{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "61",
    "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 61 of 127 61 LB15MAX2\n1 But take the example, if you would, that a document\n2 that, on its face, post-dates the charged conspiracy, for what\n3 purpose would you be offering that? And let's use the address\n4 book as an example.\n5 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\n6 With respect to that particular document, the\n7 testimony would be that that document belonged to the defendant\n8 and that she -- and the document itself would include contact\n9 information for some minor victims under a certain heading that\n10 has relevance to the case and organized in a certain way that\n11 is consistent with victim testimony. So, whether the defendant\n12 held on to that or maintained it following the conclusion of\n13 the charged conspiracy, it would nonetheless be relevant to\n14 establish the defendant's knowledge to confirm her contact with\n15 those victims and to be corroborative of other exhibits at\n16 trial.\n17 THE COURT: If the evidence were that it wasn't\n18 created or maintained until after the charged conspiracy, is it\n19 relevant?\n20 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\n21 If, at the conclusion of the conspiracy, the defendant\n22 nonetheless memorialized that information about those victims,\n23 it would nonetheless be relevant to her knowledge to rebut\n24 arguments that she didn't know the victims or have contact with\n25 them and so certainly that would be relevant, your Honor.\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00007112",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 465 Filed 11/15/21 Page 61 of 127 61 LB15MAX2",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 But take the example, if you would, that a document\n2 that, on its face, post-dates the charged conspiracy, for what\n3 purpose would you be offering that? And let's use the address\n4 book as an example.\n5 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\n6 With respect to that particular document, the\n7 testimony would be that that document belonged to the defendant\n8 and that she -- and the document itself would include contact\n9 information for some minor victims under a certain heading that\n10 has relevance to the case and organized in a certain way that\n11 is consistent with victim testimony. So, whether the defendant\n12 held on to that or maintained it following the conclusion of\n13 the charged conspiracy, it would nonetheless be relevant to\n14 establish the defendant's knowledge to confirm her contact with\n15 those victims and to be corroborative of other exhibits at\n16 trial.\n17 THE COURT: If the evidence were that it wasn't\n18 created or maintained until after the charged conspiracy, is it\n19 relevant?\n20 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\n21 If, at the conclusion of the conspiracy, the defendant\n22 nonetheless memorialized that information about those victims,\n23 it would nonetheless be relevant to her knowledge to rebut\n24 arguments that she didn't know the victims or have contact with\n25 them and so certainly that would be relevant, your Honor.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00007112",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MS. MOE"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "11/15/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 465",
      "DOJ-OGR-00007112"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}