{ "document_metadata": { "page_number": "48", "document_number": "763", "date": "08/10/22", "document_type": "court transcript", "has_handwriting": false, "has_stamps": false }, "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 48 of 197 2589 LCHVMAX2 there were thousands of photographs seized, and that there was only obviously a subset that was presented to the jury. MS. MENNINGER: Right. Ms. Meder only was speaking to photographs, your Honor, not to the number of devices. MS. COMEY: Your Honor, I would note that that was a situation where we called a witness affirmatively in our case to talk about photographic evidence that was seized; and then the defense properly cross-examined that witness about that evidence. What the defense is now suggesting they should be able to do is bring in a whole host of other investigative steps. There was Mr. Flatley, who testified about extraction from a single hard drive. I believe what Mr. Everdell is talking about is all of the other devices that were seized throughout the course of this investigation. And I think that that would be in violation of the Court's order. It would also be extremely confusing, because when we're talking about this investigation, it's a little ambiguous what we're talking about, as we alluded to earlier. This investigation was broader than just what resulted in these charges. MS. MENNINGER: Well, your Honor, there was a search that the government elicited information about that occurred in 2019 of our alleged co-conspirator's home. The question can be phrased because they -- THE COURT: Which witness was that? SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00016777", "text_blocks": [ { "type": "printed", "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 48 of 197 2589 LCHVMAX2", "position": "header" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "there were thousands of photographs seized, and that there was only obviously a subset that was presented to the jury. MS. MENNINGER: Right. Ms. Meder only was speaking to photographs, your Honor, not to the number of devices. MS. COMEY: Your Honor, I would note that that was a situation where we called a witness affirmatively in our case to talk about photographic evidence that was seized; and then the defense properly cross-examined that witness about that evidence. What the defense is now suggesting they should be able to do is bring in a whole host of other investigative steps. There was Mr. Flatley, who testified about extraction from a single hard drive. I believe what Mr. Everdell is talking about is all of the other devices that were seized throughout the course of this investigation. And I think that that would be in violation of the Court's order. It would also be extremely confusing, because when we're talking about this investigation, it's a little ambiguous what we're talking about, as we alluded to earlier. This investigation was broader than just what resulted in these charges. MS. MENNINGER: Well, your Honor, there was a search that the government elicited information about that occurred in 2019 of our alleged co-conspirator's home. The question can be phrased because they -- THE COURT: Which witness was that?", "position": "main content" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300", "position": "footer" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "DOJ-OGR-00016777", "position": "footer" } ], "entities": { "people": [ "MS. MENNINGER", "MS. COMEY", "MS. MEDER", "MR. FLATLEY", "MR. EVERDELL" ], "organizations": [ "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C." ], "locations": [], "dates": [ "08/10/22", "2019" ], "reference_numbers": [ "1:20-cr-00330-AJN", "763", "DOJ-OGR-00016777", "(212) 805-0300" ] }, "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage." }