{ "document_metadata": { "page_number": "117-120", "document_number": "A-5639", "date": "February 15, 2012", "document_type": "Court Transcript", "has_handwriting": false, "has_stamps": false }, "full_text": "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,\nFebruary 15, 2012\nPage 117 - Page 120 (30)\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS\n... (full text content of the pages 117-120)", "text_blocks": [ { "type": "printed", "content": "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,", "position": "header" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "February 15, 2012", "position": "header" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "C2FFDAU4 Conrad - direct Page 117", "position": "header" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "1 was crazy talk?\n2 MR. OKULA: Objection.\n3 A. No, I'm not a psychologist.\n4 THE COURT: Sustained.\n5 Q. Can you explain the connection, if any, between what you said about Judge Pauley receiving another Clinton appointment and the matters that were going to be discussed?", "position": "main content" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS", "position": "footer" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009922", "position": "footer" } ], "entities": { "people": [ "Paul M. Daugerdas", "Judge Pauley", "Clinton" ], "organizations": [ "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA", "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS" ], "locations": [], "dates": [ "February 15, 2012", "December 20th", "February 15th" ], "reference_numbers": [ "A-5639", "C2FFDAU4", "DOJ-OGR-00009922" ] }, "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear structure and formatting. The content is a testimony or deposition related to a legal case involving Paul M. Daugerdas. There are no visible redactions or significant damage to the document." }