mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00009943.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": null,
    "document_number": "A-5660",
    "date": "February 15, 2012",
    "document_type": "Court Transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,\nPAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,\n\nC2FFDAU6        Conrad - direct          Page 201\n1    been convicted of Count One and that a person should not have\n2    been convicted of Count One? Do you see the contradiction\n3    there?\n4    MR. OKULA: Objection, Judge. Those are not the\n5    facts.\n6    THE COURT: Yes, sustained.\n7    Q. Now, in the letter, in the letter you say -- by the way,\n8    did you choose the stamp specially for this letter that you put\n9    on?\n10   A. What?\n11   Q. Did you choose the stamp that you put on the letter\n12   specially?\n13   A. I don't know what you're talking about.\n14   Q. Well, do you see the copy of the envelope?\n15   A. That was, that was the eternity stamps or something like\nthat.\n16   Q. Do you see --\n17   A. Oh --\n18   Q. Do you see what the stamp says?\n19   A. Sorry. You're going a little too far, here, Mr. Gair.\n20   Q. I'm just asking you if you chose that stamp specially.\n21   A. I'm sure I didn't.\n22   Q. So you didn't have any other stamps, this was just one that\n23   was laying around?\n24   A. A book of stamps is a book of stamps, sir.\n\nC2FFDAU6        Conrad - direct          Page 202\n1    Q. Now, in the letter in the second paragraph, you say, \"I\n2    thought that you, Miss Davis and Mr. Hernandez did an\n3    outstanding job on behalf of our government.\" Do you see that?\n4    A. Yes, sir.\n5    Q. Is there anything unusual that you see with your knowledge\n6    of English literature in that sentence?\n7    MR. OKULA: Objection to the form, your Honor.\n8    A. I don't know what that means.\n9    THE COURT: Overruled.\n10   Q. Okay. Did you capitalize the word \"our\"?\n11   A. Oh, yes.\n12   Q. And did you capitalize the word \"government\"?\n13   A. Yes.\n14   Q. Is it your opinion that in that sentence \"our government\"\n15   is a proper noun?\n16   A. Government is.\n17   Q. Is \"our government\" a proper known?\n18   A. I don't know.\n19   Q. You capitalized it not because you believed it was a proper\n20   noun, but because you wanted to emphasize that you were talking\n21   about his government and your government, correct?\n22   A. You're slanting that. No.\n23   Q. Well, I didn't use the word \"our government\" and I didn't\n24   capitalize it. Why did you do it?\n25   A. I don't know.\n\nC2FFDAU6        Conrad - direct          Page 203\n1    Q. Did you believe that Mr. Brubaker was an idiot?\n2    A. Yes.\n3    Q. Did you believe Mr. Parse was just stupid?\n4    A. For the backdating, yes.\n5    Q. And do you believe that there's really no reason for this\n6    hearing to be undertaken at all because these people are just\n7    fricken crooks and it doesn't matter?\n8    A. Is that a question?\n9    Q. Yes, it is.\n10   A. Well, the answer is no.\n11   Q. Did you tell the Court that you thought this was all\n12   ridiculous on December 20th because these people are fricken\n13   crooks?\n14   A. I'm not sure.\n15   MR. GAIR: May I have a moment, your Honor?\n16   THE COURT: Yes. Take your time.\n17   Q. Were you suspended in the Southern District of New York?\n18   A. Sure. I must have been. Yes.\n19   Q. Did you know you were suspended in the Southern District of\n20   New York when you testified at voir dire?\n21   A. Yes. Yes.\n22   MR. GAIR: Your Honor, I would move the admission of\n23   several exhibits. PMD 1, 24, 25, 26 and 45.\n24   MR. OKULA: No objection, your Honor.\n25   THE COURT: All right. PMD Exhibits 1, 24, 25, 26 and\n\nC2FFDAU6        Conrad - direct          Page 204\n1    45 are received in evidence.\n2    (Exhibits PMD 1, 24, 25, 26 and 45 received in\n3    evidence)\n4    MR. GAIR: Nothing further, your Honor. Thank you.\n5    THE COURT: Mr. Okula.\n6    MR. OKULA: I didn't know if there were any other\n7    defense lawyers who intend to question?\n8    THE COURT: Any other defense counsel wish to inquire?\n9    MR. ROTERT: Thank you, your Honor, no inquiry for\n10   Ms. Guerin.\n11   THE COURT: Mr. Schectman?\n12   MR. SCHECTMAN: Briefly, Judge.\n13   THE COURT: Go ahead.\n14   DIRECT EXAMINATION\n15   BY MR. SCHECTMAN:\n16   Q. Ms. Conrad, could you look at your letter to Mr. Okula\n17   again, Government Exhibit 1, I believe.\n18   A. Number 7, correct?\n19   THE COURT: PMD 7.\n20   Q. PMD 7. Do you have that?\n21   A. Yes, sir.\n22   Q. And I think your testimony was that as you sit here today\n23   you don't recall why you capitalized \"our government,\" is that\n24   correct?\n25   A. Yes.\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS        (51) Page 201 - Page 204\n\nDOJ-OGR-00009943",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,\nPAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C2FFDAU6        Conrad - direct          Page 201",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1    been convicted of Count One and that a person should not have\n2    been convicted of Count One? Do you see the contradiction\n3    there?\n4    MR. OKULA: Objection, Judge. Those are not the\n5    facts.\n6    THE COURT: Yes, sustained.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS        (51) Page 201 - Page 204",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009943",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Paul M. Daugerdas",
      "Mr. Brubaker",
      "Mr. Parse",
      "Miss Davis",
      "Mr. Hernandez",
      "Mr. Okula",
      "Mr. Gair",
      "Ms. Conrad",
      "Ms. Guerin",
      "Mr. Schectman",
      "Mr. Rotert"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Southern District Reporters"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York",
      "Southern District of New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "February 15, 2012",
      "December 20th"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "A-5660",
      "C2FFDAU6",
      "PMD 1",
      "PMD 7",
      "PMD 24",
      "PMD 25",
      "PMD 26",
      "PMD 45",
      "DOJ-OGR-00009943"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document is a court transcript from a trial involving Paul M. Daugerdas and others. The transcript covers pages 201-204 of the testimony of a witness named Conrad. The testimony includes questions about a letter written by Conrad, the use of certain stamps, and the witness's beliefs about other individuals involved in the case. The transcript also includes objections and rulings by the court, as well as the admission of exhibits into evidence."
}