{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "128",
    "document_number": "A-5813",
    "date": "02/24/22",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330 Document #: 616 Filed: 02/24/22 Page 128 of 130\nA-5813\nC2grdau4 Edelstein 356\n1 THE COURT: No. My question is not whether it would\n2 have come out. If it had not come out, if the Court had not\n3 pressed your law firm and the government failed to raise the\n4 issue, would your law firm have disclosed the information set\n5 forth in the July 21 letter?\n6 THE WITNESS: I don't know.\n7 THE COURT: Did you ever have any discussion with\n8 anyone in the firm about that?\n9 THE WITNESS: I think that our, at least my, frame of\n10 mind was that we didn't know they were the same person, so I\n11 just didn't think that there was a waiver issue.\n12 THE COURT: In the middle of jury deliberations, this\n13 Court displaced Juror No. 11 because of a health emergency,\n14 replaced him with an alternate after much discussion with\n15 counsel and over the objection of the government, and directed\n16 the jury to restart its jury deliberations. Did you give any\n17 consideration at that time to raising the issue that you\n18 discussed in the park on May 12 with Ms. Brune and Ms.\n19 Trzaskoma regarding Juror No. 1?\n20 THE WITNESS: No. I continued to believe that Juror\n21 No. 1 was who she said she was. That didn't occur to me, no.\n22 THE COURT: Any further inquiries?\n23 MR. OKULA: May I follow up on one or two questions,\n24 your Honor?\n25 THE COURT: Yes.\nTHE SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00009417",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330 Document #: 616 Filed: 02/24/22 Page 128 of 130",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A-5813",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C2grdau4 Edelstein 356",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 THE COURT: No. My question is not whether it would\n2 have come out. If it had not come out, if the Court had not\n3 pressed your law firm and the government failed to raise the\n4 issue, would your law firm have disclosed the information set\n5 forth in the July 21 letter?\n6 THE WITNESS: I don't know.\n7 THE COURT: Did you ever have any discussion with\n8 anyone in the firm about that?\n9 THE WITNESS: I think that our, at least my, frame of\n10 mind was that we didn't know they were the same person, so I\n11 just didn't think that there was a waiver issue.\n12 THE COURT: In the middle of jury deliberations, this\n13 Court displaced Juror No. 11 because of a health emergency,\n14 replaced him with an alternate after much discussion with\n15 counsel and over the objection of the government, and directed\n16 the jury to restart its jury deliberations. Did you give any\n17 consideration at that time to raising the issue that you\n18 discussed in the park on May 12 with Ms. Brune and Ms.\n19 Trzaskoma regarding Juror No. 1?\n20 THE WITNESS: No. I continued to believe that Juror\n21 No. 1 was who she said she was. That didn't occur to me, no.\n22 THE COURT: Any further inquiries?\n23 MR. OKULA: May I follow up on one or two questions,\n24 your Honor?\n25 THE COURT: Yes.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009417",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Edelstein",
      "Juror No. 1",
      "Juror No. 11",
      "Ms. Brune",
      "Ms. Trzaskoma",
      "MR. OKULA"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "July 21",
      "May 12",
      "02/24/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330",
      "Document #: 616",
      "A-5813",
      "DOJ-OGR-00009417"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with clear and legible text. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}