{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "217",
    "document_number": "64432",
    "date": "August 22, 2017",
    "document_type": "Court Transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case#: 1:06-cr-00603-AJN Document#: 64432 Filed: 08/22/17 Page#: 217 of 330 A-5812\n355\nC2GFDAU3 Edelstein - redirect\n1 A. Yes.\n2 THE COURT: Mr. Schectman?\n3 MR. SCHECTMAN: And I take it because you thought it\n4 was in conceivable that this was the same person.\n5 THE WITNESS: That's right.\n6 THE COURT: Anything further, Mr. Okula?\n7 MR. OKULA: Nothing, thank you, your honor.\n8 MS. DAVIS: Just one housekeeping matter, your Honor?\n9 THE COURT: We don't need housekeeping.\n10 MS. DAVIS: It's in regard to one of the exhibits we\n11 want to move into evidence.\n12 THE COURT: Let's complete the inquiry, Ms. Davis,\n13 that's the way it proceeds. I have a few questions for the\n14 witness.\n15 MS. DAVIS: I apologize, your Honor.\n16 THE COURT: Ms. Edelstein, I want to put a question to\n17 you that I put to Ms. Brune. Focusing on the July 21 letter to\n18 the Court, would your law firm have disclosed the information\n19 set forth in that letter and the investigation of Juror No. 1\n20 if the Court had not inquired or the government failed to raise\n21 the waiver issue?\n22 THE WITNESS: I think by that point, I mean, I think\n23 yes, that we had thought that it would come out at some point\n24 during --\n25 (Continued next page)\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00010095",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case#: 1:06-cr-00603-AJN Document#: 64432 Filed: 08/22/17 Page#: 217 of 330 A-5812",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "355\nC2GFDAU3 Edelstein - redirect",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 A. Yes.\n2 THE COURT: Mr. Schectman?\n3 MR. SCHECTMAN: And I take it because you thought it\n4 was in conceivable that this was the same person.\n5 THE WITNESS: That's right.\n6 THE COURT: Anything further, Mr. Okula?\n7 MR. OKULA: Nothing, thank you, your honor.\n8 MS. DAVIS: Just one housekeeping matter, your Honor?\n9 THE COURT: We don't need housekeeping.\n10 MS. DAVIS: It's in regard to one of the exhibits we\n11 want to move into evidence.\n12 THE COURT: Let's complete the inquiry, Ms. Davis,\n13 that's the way it proceeds. I have a few questions for the\n14 witness.\n15 MS. DAVIS: I apologize, your Honor.\n16 THE COURT: Ms. Edelstein, I want to put a question to\n17 you that I put to Ms. Brune. Focusing on the July 21 letter to\n18 the Court, would your law firm have disclosed the information\n19 set forth in that letter and the investigation of Juror No. 1\n20 if the Court had not inquired or the government failed to raise\n21 the waiver issue?\n22 THE WITNESS: I think by that point, I mean, I think\n23 yes, that we had thought that it would come out at some point\n24 during --\n25 (Continued next page)",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00010095",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Schectman",
      "Okula",
      "Davis",
      "Edelstein",
      "Brune"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "July 21",
      "August 22, 2017"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:06-cr-00603-AJN",
      "64432",
      "DOJ-OGR-00010095"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document is a court transcript with a clear and legible format. The text is typed, and there are no visible redactions or damage."
}