{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "337",
    "document_number": "A-5794",
    "date": null,
    "document_type": "Court Transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "C2GFDAU3 Edelstein 337\n1 surprising and shocking to hear what a member of the jury had\n2 to say.\n3 I think when I first called Susan, we spoke about the\n4 letter and that was our first conversation of that letter.\n5 Q. And in that first conversation did you and Ms. Brune\n6 discuss the feeling that what had been -- or after you received\n7 the letter or reviewed the other document, that that related to\n8 the exact same issue that Theresa Trzaskoma related to you on\n9 May 12. When did you put that together?\n10 MR. GAIR: Objection to the form of the question.\n11 Unintelligible.\n12 THE COURT: Sustained as to form.\n13 Q. At some point did you connect the dots as to what Theresa\n14 Trzaskoma told you on May 12 and the jury letter that you\n15 received?\n16 A. What happened next was that it took me, I sat in my office\n17 for a while mulling over the letter. I then was speaking later\n18 that afternoon with my partner Randy Kim in our San Francisco\n19 office. I mentioned I found the note, the letter, it was very\n20 disturbing to me. The tone was very odd, there are all these\n21 exclamation points, the underlining, the parentheticals with\n22 her speaking to herself, commenting on her own words, and it\n23 just seemed so at odds with what I had observed of Juror No. 1\n24 during the trial.\n25 He's the one who mentioned to me, he said, well, come\n SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n (212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C2GFDAU3 Edelstein 337",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 surprising and shocking to hear what a member of the jury had\n2 to say.\n3 I think when I first called Susan, we spoke about the\n4 letter and that was our first conversation of that letter.\n5 Q. And in that first conversation did you and Ms. Brune\n6 discuss the feeling that what had been -- or after you received\n7 the letter or reviewed the other document, that that related to\n8 the exact same issue that Theresa Trzaskoma related to you on\n9 May 12. When did you put that together?\n10 MR. GAIR: Objection to the form of the question.\n11 Unintelligible.\n12 THE COURT: Sustained as to form.\n13 Q. At some point did you connect the dots as to what Theresa\n14 Trzaskoma told you on May 12 and the jury letter that you\n15 received?\n16 A. What happened next was that it took me, I sat in my office\n17 for a while mulling over the letter. I then was speaking later\n18 that afternoon with my partner Randy Kim in our San Francisco\n19 office. I mentioned I found the note, the letter, it was very\n20 disturbing to me. The tone was very odd, there are all these\n21 exclamation points, the underlining, the parentheticals with\n22 her speaking to herself, commenting on her own words, and it\n23 just seemed so at odds with what I had observed of Juror No. 1\n24 during the trial.\n25 He's the one who mentioned to me, he said, well, come",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Susan",
      "Ms. Brune",
      "Theresa Trzaskoma",
      "MR. GAIR",
      "Randy Kim"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "San Francisco"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "May 12"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "C2GFDAU3",
      "A-5794"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and readable format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}