{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "14",
    "document_number": "18",
    "date": "07/16/19",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case18-cr-00490-RMB Document 18 Filed 07/16/19 Page 14 of 18 14\n1\nMR. ROSSMILLER: Your Honor, I think we addressed that\n2\nin our initial submission. To the extent defense counsel has a\n3\nresponse to it, we will evaluate that response and see whether\n4\nadditional submission from the government is required or\n5\nappropriate.\n6\nTHE COURT: I think that's it for me in terms of\n7\nquestions that I might have had.\n8\nThere is, of course, a conspiracy charge here, one of\n9\nthe two counts. It may be early in your investigation to know.\n10\nDo you anticipate that there may be other defendants in this\n11\nproceeding?\n12\nMR. ROSSMILLER: Your Honor, we don't expect any\n13\nimminent superseding indictments in this case. It certainly is\n14\npossible down the road.\n15\nMR. WEINGARTEN: May I make one point, your Honor?\n16\nThese obstruction allegations we find very nettlesome and\n17\nbothering. My understanding is that the Feds and Mr. Epstein's\n18\nattorneys back in the early 2000s, or 2007 and 8, when they\n19\nwere negotiating were looking desperately for an appropriate\n20\nstatute. They finally settled on a state statute that Mr.\n21\nEpstein pled to. We all know how unusual that is. There was\n22\nsome consideration of a federal statute, including obstruction.\n23\nSo lawyers in good faith were having discussions back\n24\nand forth whether or not they could squeeze Mr. Epstein's\n25\nconduct into a particular statute, and they concluded they\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00000400",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case18-cr-00490-RMB Document 18 Filed 07/16/19 Page 14 of 18 14",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "MR. ROSSMILLER: Your Honor, I think we addressed that in our initial submission. To the extent defense counsel has a response to it, we will evaluate that response and see whether additional submission from the government is required or appropriate.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: I think that's it for me in terms of questions that I might have had.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "There is, of course, a conspiracy charge here, one of the two counts. It may be early in your investigation to know. Do you anticipate that there may be other defendants in this proceeding?",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "MR. ROSSMILLER: Your Honor, we don't expect any imminent superseding indictments in this case. It certainly is possible down the road.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "MR. WEINGARTEN: May I make one point, your Honor? These obstruction allegations we find very nettlesome and bothering. My understanding is that the Feds and Mr. Epstein's attorneys back in the early 2000s, or 2007 and 8, when they were negotiating were looking desperately for an appropriate statute. They finally settled on a state statute that Mr. Epstein pled to. We all know how unusual that is. There was some consideration of a federal statute, including obstruction.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "So lawyers in good faith were having discussions back and forth whether or not they could squeeze Mr. Epstein's conduct into a particular statute, and they concluded they",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00000400",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. ROSSMILLER",
      "THE COURT",
      "MR. WEINGARTEN",
      "Mr. Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "07/16/19",
      "early 2000s",
      "2007",
      "2008"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "18-cr-00490-RMB",
      "Document 18",
      "DOJ-OGR-00000400"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}