{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "14",
    "document_number": "773",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 773 Filed 08/10/22 Page 14 of 29 LCRVMAXT 3131\n1 We can't tell which flight we're talking about, which\n2 leg of a potentially multi-leg trip we're talking about. And\n3 so I think here, again, the Court gave a thorough instruction\n4 about this particular element. Because we can't tell which set\n5 of facts they are asking about, I think the proper course here\n6 is to refer the jury to the particulars with respect to this\n7 element.\n8 THE COURT: It's difficult to know and to have in my\n9 head, based on the articulation of the question, as well as the\n10 testimony, exactly what they are referring to. I don't know.\n11 So I am inclined to follow the government's suggestion\n12 here and to say, I can't provide an additional response to your\n13 question other than to consider carefully the instructions as\n14 to -- I mean, I could either point them to all of the count or\n15 specifically to the second element, since that's what they're\n16 asking about.\n17 MR. EVERDELL: If we're going to just refer them to\n18 certain language, I think we refer them to the language in the\n19 last paragraph.\n20 THE COURT: Page?\n21 MR. EVERDELL: Page 28, instruction number 21, lines\n22 14 through 17.\n23 MS. MOE: Your Honor, those particular lines don't\n24 appear to be what the jury is asking about. I recognize that\n25 the note refers to Count Four and the second element, but the\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 773 Filed 08/10/22 Page 14 of 29 LCRVMAXT 3131",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 We can't tell which flight we're talking about, which\n2 leg of a potentially multi-leg trip we're talking about. And\n3 so I think here, again, the Court gave a thorough instruction\n4 about this particular element. Because we can't tell which set\n5 of facts they are asking about, I think the proper course here\n6 is to refer the jury to the particulars with respect to this\n7 element.\n8 THE COURT: It's difficult to know and to have in my\n9 head, based on the articulation of the question, as well as the\n10 testimony, exactly what they are referring to. I don't know.\n11 So I am inclined to follow the government's suggestion\n12 here and to say, I can't provide an additional response to your\n13 question other than to consider carefully the instructions as\n14 to -- I mean, I could either point them to all of the count or\n15 specifically to the second element, since that's what they're\n16 asking about.\n17 MR. EVERDELL: If we're going to just refer them to\n18 certain language, I think we refer them to the language in the\n19 last paragraph.\n20 THE COURT: Page?\n21 MR. EVERDELL: Page 28, instruction number 21, lines\n22 14 through 17.\n23 MS. MOE: Your Honor, those particular lines don't\n24 appear to be what the jury is asking about. I recognize that\n25 the note refers to Count Four and the second element, but the",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. EVERDELL",
      "MS. MOE"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.",
      "THE COURT"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "773",
      "28",
      "21",
      "14",
      "17",
      "Four"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}