{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "23",
    "document_number": "755",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 755 Filed 08/10/22 Page 23 of 262 1728\nLC8Cmax1\n1 sure?\n2 MR. ROHRBACH: It's in the matter of -- it starts with an L. I can't give the cite off the top of my head. I wasn't expecting this particular argument today.\n3 THE COURT: If that theory applies for the content of 824, I'll consider it, so you'll let me know.\n4 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor. I just haven't asked Ms. Gill about their reliance on this record, which is similar to the questions the Court has been asking for, so I couldn't articulate that theory of a business record for 824 right now.\n5 THE COURT: Right. Sounds like a similar --\n6 MS. STERNHEIM: Just to close the loop, with regard to the Court's statement that it was a relevant time period, it's my recollection that Mr. Alessi testified to 2001, and the fact that someone may be employed is not a basis for an inference that a child of that employee was at a certain location at a certain time, which is why the government is seeking to introduce that.\n7 THE COURT: We'll leave the fact finding to the jury.\n8 MS. STERNHEIM: Okay.\n9 THE COURT: Thank you.\n10 MR. ROHRBACH: Thank you, your Honor.\n11 THE COURT: Anything else? We'll still have to wait for our juror who had substantial train issues. So we will wait. I'll step down. Thank you.\n12 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00013301",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 755 Filed 08/10/22 Page 23 of 262 1728",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LC8Cmax1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 sure?\n2 MR. ROHRBACH: It's in the matter of -- it starts with an L. I can't give the cite off the top of my head. I wasn't expecting this particular argument today.\n3 THE COURT: If that theory applies for the content of 824, I'll consider it, so you'll let me know.\n4 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor. I just haven't asked Ms. Gill about their reliance on this record, which is similar to the questions the Court has been asking for, so I couldn't articulate that theory of a business record for 824 right now.\n5 THE COURT: Right. Sounds like a similar --\n6 MS. STERNHEIM: Just to close the loop, with regard to the Court's statement that it was a relevant time period, it's my recollection that Mr. Alessi testified to 2001, and the fact that someone may be employed is not a basis for an inference that a child of that employee was at a certain location at a certain time, which is why the government is seeking to introduce that.\n7 THE COURT: We'll leave the fact finding to the jury.\n8 MS. STERNHEIM: Okay.\n9 THE COURT: Thank you.\n10 MR. ROHRBACH: Thank you, your Honor.\n11 THE COURT: Anything else? We'll still have to wait for our juror who had substantial train issues. So we will wait. I'll step down. Thank you.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00013301",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. ROHRBACH",
      "Ms. Gill",
      "MS. STERNHEIM",
      "Mr. Alessi"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22",
      "2001"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "755",
      "824",
      "DOJ-OGR-00013301"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}