| 12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152 |
- {
- "document_metadata": {
- "page_number": "17",
- "document_number": "747",
- "date": "08/10/22",
- "document_type": "court transcript",
- "has_handwriting": false,
- "has_stamps": false
- },
- "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 747 Filed 08/10/22 Page 17 of 228 693 LC2VMAX2 Kane - Direct 1 follow-up. 2 Yesterday we heard from Jane. She disputed the accuracy of some of the applications that came in in terms of the summer camp. She said that I recognize my mother's handwriting, and she talked about her mother not being reliable about other things. The government could have put on this document through her if this information was reliable. They chose not to. I don't think that there's a sufficient record to put this on through 803(6). 10 MR. ROHRBACH: Your Honor, I'm quite surprised defense counsel is making this argument. There are several admissions applications that are already in the record, including ones offered by defense counsel. This particular document was used in cross-examination of Jane yesterday and portions were read into the record; so the rest of the document is something that's fair game to come into the record. 17 Specifically about the business records exception, police reports are accepted from the police records doctrine. And this document otherwise needs to go in for comments of the business record, both in the traditional classical sense of a business record, but also, as the additional voir dire showed, it's been integrated into the files of the school; the school had relied on it in its business practices, which, at a minimum, makes it an adoptive business record of the school. 25 THE COURT: Overruled. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00012302",
- "text_blocks": [
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 747 Filed 08/10/22 Page 17 of 228 693 LC2VMAX2 Kane - Direct",
- "position": "header"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "1 follow-up. 2 Yesterday we heard from Jane. She disputed the accuracy of some of the applications that came in in terms of the summer camp. She said that I recognize my mother's handwriting, and she talked about her mother not being reliable about other things. The government could have put on this document through her if this information was reliable. They chose not to. I don't think that there's a sufficient record to put this on through 803(6). 10 MR. ROHRBACH: Your Honor, I'm quite surprised defense counsel is making this argument. There are several admissions applications that are already in the record, including ones offered by defense counsel. This particular document was used in cross-examination of Jane yesterday and portions were read into the record; so the rest of the document is something that's fair game to come into the record. 17 Specifically about the business records exception, police reports are accepted from the police records doctrine. And this document otherwise needs to go in for comments of the business record, both in the traditional classical sense of a business record, but also, as the additional voir dire showed, it's been integrated into the files of the school; the school had relied on it in its business practices, which, at a minimum, makes it an adoptive business record of the school.",
- "position": "main"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "25 THE COURT: Overruled.",
- "position": "main"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00012302",
- "position": "footer"
- }
- ],
- "entities": {
- "people": [
- "Jane",
- "MR. ROHRBACH"
- ],
- "organizations": [
- "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
- ],
- "locations": [],
- "dates": [
- "08/10/22"
- ],
- "reference_numbers": [
- "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
- "747",
- "DOJ-OGR-00012302"
- ]
- },
- "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
- }
|