mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00012100.json

{
  "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."
}