{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "4",
    "document_number": "55503",
    "date": "12/13/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "the slides following the conclusion of closing arguments. During trial, exhibits have been provided in the same way, that is, as soon as the parties have had time to review them following the conclusion of the trial day, rather than provided to the public at the time they are offered into evidence. The parties jointly agree that this proposal appropriately balances the parties' interest in efficient and effective advocacy and the privacy interests of victims and third parties with the public right of access. The public right of access is strong, but \"countervailing factors may overcome the presumption of access,\" including the defendant's right to a fair trial. United States v. Graham, 257 F.3d 143, 154 (2d Cir. 2001). Under the parties' proposal, the public right of access is fully satisfied—just soon after the trial day.3 That minimal burden on the public right is outweighed by the other interests at stake. 3 As an alternative, the Government is willing to provide printed versions of a redacted version of its slides before the summation begins to members of the public in attendance, so they can follow along during the summation. The defense is opposed to this process for the reasons already identified in the above text, including specifically the need to adjust certain slides or materials to respond to the government's closing, which cannot be anticipated in advance of its presentation. 4 DOJ-OGR-00008451",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "the slides following the conclusion of closing arguments. During trial, exhibits have been provided in the same way, that is, as soon as the parties have had time to review them following the conclusion of the trial day, rather than provided to the public at the time they are offered into evidence.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The parties jointly agree that this proposal appropriately balances the parties' interest in efficient and effective advocacy and the privacy interests of victims and third parties with the public right of access. The public right of access is strong, but \"countervailing factors may overcome the presumption of access,\" including the defendant's right to a fair trial. United States v. Graham, 257 F.3d 143, 154 (2d Cir. 2001). Under the parties' proposal, the public right of access is fully satisfied—just soon after the trial day.3 That minimal burden on the public right is outweighed by the other interests at stake.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "3 As an alternative, the Government is willing to provide printed versions of a redacted version of its slides before the summation begins to members of the public in attendance, so they can follow along during the summation. The defense is opposed to this process for the reasons already identified in the above text, including specifically the need to adjust certain slides or materials to respond to the government's closing, which cannot be anticipated in advance of its presentation.",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "4",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00008451",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [
      "Government"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "12/13/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "55503",
      "DOJ-OGR-00008451",
      "2020-cr-00083"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the handling of trial exhibits and public access. It includes a reference to a specific court case (United States v. Graham) and discusses the balance between public access and privacy interests."
}