{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "6",
    "document_number": "457",
    "date": "11/13/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 457 Filed 11/13/21 Page 6 of 8 Page 6 B. Relevance Federal Rule of Evidence 401 defines \"relevant evidence\" as evidence that \"has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence\" provided that \"the fact is of consequence in determining the action.\" Relevant evidence is \"not confined to that which directly establishes an element of the crime.\" United States v. Gonzalez, 110 F.3d 941, 942 (2d Cir. 1997). As the Second Circuit has explained, \"[t]o be relevant, evidence need only tend to prove the government's case, and evidence that adds context and dimension to the government's proof of the charges can have that tendency.\" Id. Government Exhibit 52 is plainly relevant. The specific excerpts from the exhibit that the Government seeks to offer include the names and contact information of The presence of those names and phone numbers establishes that the defendant possessed contact information for which of course is of significant relevance at this trial. This evidence thus demonstrates that the defendant in fact knew with respect to several of the contacts listed in , which support an inference that the defendant knew that at least some of these individuals were minors. While Employee-1 did not see the defendant's contact book until , the contents of the book make plain that it contains information gathered previously, during the course of the charged criminal case. Nothing about those circumstances affects the admissibility of this exhibit. Indeed, if anything, they cut in favor of authenticity: if Rodriguez had fabricated Government Exhibit 52, then he would not have been guilty of obstruction of justice. But the opposite happened. Rodriguez admitted that this evidence was genuine and that he was guilty of obstruction of justice for concealing it. DOJ-OGR-00006968",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 457 Filed 11/13/21 Page 6 of 8",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Page 6",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "B. Relevance Federal Rule of Evidence 401 defines \"relevant evidence\" as evidence that \"has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence\" provided that \"the fact is of consequence in determining the action.\" Relevant evidence is \"not confined to that which directly establishes an element of the crime.\" United States v. Gonzalez, 110 F.3d 941, 942 (2d Cir. 1997). As the Second Circuit has explained, \"[t]o be relevant, evidence need only tend to prove the government's case, and evidence that adds context and dimension to the government's proof of the charges can have that tendency.\" Id. Government Exhibit 52 is plainly relevant. The specific excerpts from the exhibit that the Government seeks to offer include the names and contact information of The presence of those names and phone numbers establishes that the defendant possessed contact information for which of course is of significant relevance at this trial. This evidence thus demonstrates that the defendant in fact knew with respect to several of the contacts listed in , which support an inference that the defendant knew that at least some of these individuals were minors. While Employee-1 did not see the defendant's contact book until , the contents of the book make plain that it contains information gathered previously, during the course of the charged criminal case. Nothing about those circumstances affects the admissibility of this exhibit. Indeed, if anything, they cut in favor of authenticity: if Rodriguez had fabricated Government Exhibit 52, then he would not have been guilty of obstruction of justice. But the opposite happened. Rodriguez admitted that this evidence was genuine and that he was guilty of obstruction of justice for concealing it.",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00006968",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Gonzalez",
      "Rodriguez",
      "Employee-1"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Second Circuit"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "11/13/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 457",
      "Government Exhibit 52",
      "DOJ-OGR-00006968"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing with redactions in the main body. The redactions are likely related to sensitive information in the case."
}