{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "8",
    "document_number": "753",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 753 Filed 08/10/22 Page 8 of 264 1430 LC7VMAX1\n\n1 With respect to his communications with Jane, we\n2 memorialized what Brian told us about that in our notes and\n3 provided them to defense; and so we've been transparent about\n4 that.\n5 I don't think those notes or that conversation in any\n6 way suggests that witnesses are doing something improper or\n7 that anyone is coaching anyone to say something in particular.\n8 And again, this witness has been on the record with the\n9 government about this issue long before the trial.\n10 THE COURT: Well, obviously if I allow the testimony,\n11 it's fair grounds for cross, needless to say.\n12 MS. MOE: Of course, your Honor.\n13 THE COURT: And where is he in the order of things\n14 today?\n15 MS. MOE: He would be the next witness after the\n16 witness who's currently on the stand.\n17 THE COURT: Ms. Menninger, so given the timing of\n18 where we are, do you have any authority to support the\n19 proposition that -- other than obviously it being fair grounds\n20 for cross, that this is a violation of order or law that would\n21 suggest a quite substantial remedy of excluding testimony?\n22 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, I have not had time to\n23 research this. I think that the disclosure came in around 3\n24 o'clock in the morning. And without revealing what time I got\n25 up, I have not had time to research that question between when\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 753 Filed 08/10/22 Page 8 of 264 1430 LC7VMAX1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "With respect to his communications with Jane, we memorialized what Brian told us about that in our notes and provided them to defense; and so we've been transparent about that. I don't think those notes or that conversation in any way suggests that witnesses are doing something improper or that anyone is coaching anyone to say something in particular. And again, this witness has been on the record with the government about this issue long before the trial.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: Well, obviously if I allow the testimony, it's fair grounds for cross, needless to say. MS. MOE: Of course, your Honor. THE COURT: And where is he in the order of things today? MS. MOE: He would be the next witness after the witness who's currently on the stand.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: Ms. Menninger, so given the timing of where we are, do you have any authority to support the proposition that -- other than obviously it being fair grounds for cross, that this is a violation of order or law that would suggest a quite substantial remedy of excluding testimony? MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, I have not had time to research this. I think that the disclosure came in around 3 o'clock in the morning. And without revealing what time I got up, I have not had time to research that question between when",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jane",
      "Brian",
      "Ms. Moe",
      "Ms. Menninger"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "753",
      "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."
}