{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "29",
    "document_number": "739",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 739 Filed 08/10/22 Page 29 of 43 29 LBNAMAXTps\n1    MR. ROHRBACH: I apologize, your Honor. I'm just\n2    trying to pull find that. This is for the --\n3    THE COURT: For witness 3.\n4    MR. ROHRBACH: For witness 3. Yes, your Honor, we\n5    agree that's a correct statement of the law.\n6    THE COURT: But you want to add \"solely.\"\n7    MR. ROHRBACH: Yes. The government thinks that that\n8    clarification --\n9    THE COURT: Let me ask you this. So if you add\n10   \"solely,\" then, to my ear, it would mean that you can convict\n11   the defendant on the basis of the testimony of witness 3\n12   regarding the sexual conduct between this witness and\n13   Mr. Epstein, and other evidence regarding the sexual conduct\n14   between this witness and Mr. Epstein. Is that a correct\n15   statement of law?\n16   MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor. Insofar as the Court\n17   has ruled that evidence related to witness 3 is direct evidence\n18   of the offense, if that is offered in combination with other\n19   evidence in the case that goes --\n20   THE COURT: No, I think maybe you misunderstood my\n21   question. The government has said that the sexual conduct\n22   between Mr. Epstein and this witness took place over all\n23   relevant ages of consent. Correct?\n24   MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor.\n25   THE COURT: So the defendant can't be convicted based\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00011650",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 739 Filed 08/10/22 Page 29 of 43 29 LBNAMAXTps",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1    MR. ROHRBACH: I apologize, your Honor. I'm just\n2    trying to pull find that. This is for the --\n3    THE COURT: For witness 3.\n4    MR. ROHRBACH: For witness 3. Yes, your Honor, we\n5    agree that's a correct statement of the law.\n6    THE COURT: But you want to add \"solely.\"\n7    MR. ROHRBACH: Yes. The government thinks that that\n8    clarification --\n9    THE COURT: Let me ask you this. So if you add\n10   \"solely,\" then, to my ear, it would mean that you can convict\n11   the defendant on the basis of the testimony of witness 3\n12   regarding the sexual conduct between this witness and\n13   Mr. Epstein, and other evidence regarding the sexual conduct\n14   between this witness and Mr. Epstein. Is that a correct\n15   statement of law?\n16   MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor. Insofar as the Court\n17   has ruled that evidence related to witness 3 is direct evidence\n18   of the offense, if that is offered in combination with other\n19   evidence in the case that goes --\n20   THE COURT: No, I think maybe you misunderstood my\n21   question. The government has said that the sexual conduct\n22   between Mr. Epstein and this witness took place over all\n23   relevant ages of consent. Correct?\n24   MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor.\n25   THE COURT: So the defendant can't be convicted based",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00011650",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. ROHRBACH",
      "THE COURT",
      "Mr. Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "739",
      "DOJ-OGR-00011650"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}