{ "document_metadata": { "page_number": "80", "document_number": "745", "date": "08/10/22", "document_type": "court transcript", "has_handwriting": false, "has_stamps": false }, "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 745 Filed 08/10/22 Page 80 of 264 486 LC1VMAX3 Jane - cross 1 MS. MENNINGER: We cross bridges that -- 2 THE COURT: Right. 3 And if the answer is -- so she says no. And you show 4 it to her and ask if that refreshes her recollection. And if 5 the answer is no, we move on. 6 MS. MENNINGER: The second one, your Honor, is in the 7 victims' compensation program. As your Honor may have seen, 8 she was offered an award. And after that award was offered, 9 her lawyer -- the same lawyer in that proceeding -- wrote 10 basically a motion for reconsideration and said that the award 11 was not appropriate; that it should at least be an eight-figure 12 award. So that delayed the whole -- you know, her decision to 13 join in the -- or to accept the award. And I believe that is, 14 again, an adoptive admission or a statement because he was 15 acting in her capacity as her lawyer in a civil case while this 16 criminal case was pending. 17 THE COURT: So what's the question you'll ask. 18 MS. MENNINGER: They are the same, your Honor. It's 19 essentially, Didn't you get offered an award of $5 million and 20 felt that that was not sufficient? And your attorney, on your 21 behalf, went back to the claims program and asked for an 22 eight-figure settlement instead. 23 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. 24 Again, the substance of that testimony would only be 25 relevant under Rule 408. If this witness knows about it and, SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00012100", "text_blocks": [ { "type": "printed", "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 745 Filed 08/10/22 Page 80 of 264 486", "position": "header" }, { "type": "handwritten", "content": "LC1VMAX3 Jane - cross", "position": "margin" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "1 MS. MENNINGER: We cross bridges that -- 2 THE COURT: Right. 3 And if the answer is -- so she says no. And you show 4 it to her and ask if that refreshes her recollection. And if 5 the answer is no, we move on. 6 MS. MENNINGER: The second one, your Honor, is in the 7 victims' compensation program. As your Honor may have seen, 8 she was offered an award. And after that award was offered, 9 her lawyer -- the same lawyer in that proceeding -- wrote 10 basically a motion for reconsideration and said that the award 11 was not appropriate; that it should at least be an eight-figure 12 award. So that delayed the whole -- you know, her decision to 13 join in the -- or to accept the award. And I believe that is, 14 again, an adoptive admission or a statement because he was 15 acting in her capacity as her lawyer in a civil case while this 16 criminal case was pending. 17 THE COURT: So what's the question you'll ask. 18 MS. MENNINGER: They are the same, your Honor. It's 19 essentially, Didn't you get offered an award of $5 million and 20 felt that that was not sufficient? And your attorney, on your 21 behalf, went back to the claims program and asked for an 22 eight-figure settlement instead. 23 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. 24 Again, the substance of that testimony would only be 25 relevant under Rule 408. If this witness knows about it and,", "position": "main content" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300", "position": "footer" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "DOJ-OGR-00012100", "position": "footer" } ], "entities": { "people": [ "MS. MENNINGER", "THE COURT", "MS. MOE" ], "organizations": [ "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C." ], "locations": [], "dates": [ "08/10/22" ], "reference_numbers": [ "1:20-cr-00330-PAE", "745", "DOJ-OGR-00012100" ] }, "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage." }