{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "153",
    "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 153 of 197 2694 LCHCmax5 that person because, at that point, we were still trying to gather the information to see if he could be a witness. I didn't -- there was nothing to disclose at that point because we were still working this out to make sure we had this person lined up and they would be a witness with relevant admissible information. His 26.2 material would be a one-page or maybe a two-page declaration, which could be reviewed in 10 minutes, so I don't think that's an issue. The name of the person is sort of irrelevant. We said it was going to be a witness -- sorry, your Honor. And I believe the Court did say, I'm looking at the transcript on page 25 -- THE COURT: This is from yesterday? MR. EVERDELL: Yes, it's from December 16th, so that is yesterday, at page 2534, I had said, I think if we went over in the morning, even if we had this one witness, it would be very brief, so we could have almost a full day on Monday. The Court responds okay. So finishing tomorrow or a very short witness on Monday means closings on Monday and then a charge to the jury. Okay, I'll permit that, so long as it does not interfere with that schedule. So we were on the assumption that we could get this -- THE COURT: I didn't know until now that that -- something in the course of the conversation, my memory of it is that it was Ms. Menninger who noted that there was one small SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00016882",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 153 of 197 2694 LCHCmax5",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "that person because, at that point, we were still trying to gather the information to see if he could be a witness. I didn't -- there was nothing to disclose at that point because we were still working this out to make sure we had this person lined up and they would be a witness with relevant admissible information. His 26.2 material would be a one-page or maybe a two-page declaration, which could be reviewed in 10 minutes, so I don't think that's an issue. The name of the person is sort of irrelevant. We said it was going to be a witness -- sorry, your Honor. And I believe the Court did say, I'm looking at the transcript on page 25 -- THE COURT: This is from yesterday? MR. EVERDELL: Yes, it's from December 16th, so that is yesterday, at page 2534, I had said, I think if we went over in the morning, even if we had this one witness, it would be very brief, so we could have almost a full day on Monday. The Court responds okay. So finishing tomorrow or a very short witness on Monday means closings on Monday and then a charge to the jury. Okay, I'll permit that, so long as it does not interfere with that schedule. So we were on the assumption that we could get this -- THE COURT: I didn't know until now that that -- something in the course of the conversation, my memory of it is that it was Ms. Menninger who noted that there was one small",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00016882",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Menninger",
      "MR. EVERDELL"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22",
      "December 16th"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "763",
      "DOJ-OGR-00016882"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and readable format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}