{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "50",
    "document_number": "465",
    "date": "11/15/21",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 465 Filed 11/15/21 Page 50 of 127 LB15MAX2\n\n1 MS. MENNINGER: No. Thank you, your Honor.\n2 THE COURT: All right.\n3 Anything else before turning to the defense motion?\n4 MS. MOE: No, your Honor.\n5 MS. STERNHEIM: No, thank you.\n6 THE COURT: Defense 1 relates to the government's disclosure of co-conspirator statements. The parties spill a lot of ink about the meaning of prior orders and whether the government has fully met its disclosure obligations as set out by those orders. The government did not violate my orders and the defense motion to preclude the government from introducing any alleged co-conspirator statements is denied.\nI do think the schedule, as set out in this case, has provided for certainly a vastly earlier disclosure schedule than any other trial over which I have previously presided and I do think the defense is well equipped to know what is coming and can responsibly raise issues that can be dealt with in advance of trial. Here, the defense has the names of the co-conspirators who will be mentioned by the government at trial and it has the government's marked exhibits, and although it doesn't feel like it, we still have a month to go before trial. That said, here is how we will proceed on this point -- and this is another homework assignment.\nBy this Thursday, November 4, the government will provide to the defense the categories of the kinds of\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00007101",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 465 Filed 11/15/21 Page 50 of 127 LB15MAX2",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 MS. MENNINGER: No. Thank you, your Honor.\n2 THE COURT: All right.\n3 Anything else before turning to the defense motion?\n4 MS. MOE: No, your Honor.\n5 MS. STERNHEIM: No, thank you.\n6 THE COURT: Defense 1 relates to the government's disclosure of co-conspirator statements. The parties spill a lot of ink about the meaning of prior orders and whether the government has fully met its disclosure obligations as set out by those orders. The government did not violate my orders and the defense motion to preclude the government from introducing any alleged co-conspirator statements is denied.\nI do think the schedule, as set out in this case, has provided for certainly a vastly earlier disclosure schedule than any other trial over which I have previously presided and I do think the defense is well equipped to know what is coming and can responsibly raise issues that can be dealt with in advance of trial. Here, the defense has the names of the co-conspirators who will be mentioned by the government at trial and it has the government's marked exhibits, and although it doesn't feel like it, we still have a month to go before trial. That said, here is how we will proceed on this point -- and this is another homework assignment.\nBy this Thursday, November 4, the government will provide to the defense the categories of the kinds of",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00007101",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MS. MENNINGER",
      "MS. MOE",
      "MS. STERNHEIM"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "November 4",
      "11/15/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 465",
      "DOJ-OGR-00007101"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}