{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "29",
    "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 29 of 127 29 LB15MAX2\n\n1 THE COURT: (Continuing)\n2 I imagine this can be done through cross-examination questions if the witness has personal knowledge. I would also encourage the parties to discuss stipulations in this regard to provide the jury any necessary and non-prejudicial context or background, or other proposals for permitting the jury to understand the background or context without crossing over into the 403 prejudice line.\n3 I also would permit the defense to cross-examine law enforcement officers about the investigative steps that were taken if the government puts the thoroughness of the investigation into issue as this, too, would be permissible impeachment and cross.\n4 These articulated lines of cross-examination of government witnesses would be relevant to impeach a witness by suggesting bias or otherwise implicating their credibility. Moreover, denying Ms. Maxwell these lines of questioning would have implications under the confrontation clause. The Court expects that the probative value would not be substantially outweighed by 403 prejudice if done along the lines of what I have indicated, especially if accompanied by a limiting instruction by the Court that, for example, prior inconsistent statements are to be considered for their impeachment value and the like.\n5 Similarly, the Court may instruct the jury that\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00007080",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 465 Filed 11/15/21 Page 29 of 127 29 LB15MAX2",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 THE COURT: (Continuing)\n2 I imagine this can be done through cross-examination questions if the witness has personal knowledge. I would also encourage the parties to discuss stipulations in this regard to provide the jury any necessary and non-prejudicial context or background, or other proposals for permitting the jury to understand the background or context without crossing over into the 403 prejudice line.\n3 I also would permit the defense to cross-examine law enforcement officers about the investigative steps that were taken if the government puts the thoroughness of the investigation into issue as this, too, would be permissible impeachment and cross.\n4 These articulated lines of cross-examination of government witnesses would be relevant to impeach a witness by suggesting bias or otherwise implicating their credibility. Moreover, denying Ms. Maxwell these lines of questioning would have implications under the confrontation clause. The Court expects that the probative value would not be substantially outweighed by 403 prejudice if done along the lines of what I have indicated, especially if accompanied by a limiting instruction by the Court that, for example, prior inconsistent statements are to be considered for their impeachment value and the like.\n5 Similarly, the Court may instruct the jury that",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00007080",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "11/15/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 465",
      "DOJ-OGR-00007080"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}