mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES003/DOJ-OGR-00005966.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "11",
    "document_number": "398",
    "date": "10/29/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 398 Filed 10/29/21 Page 11 of 52\n\nD. There are Substantial Issues with the Government's Anticipated Position\n\nFor a statement to fall within the definition of Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(2)(E), \"a court must find (1) that there was a conspiracy, (2) that its members included the declarant and the party against whom the statement is offered, and (3) that the statement was made both (a) during the course of and (b) in furtherance of the conspiracy.\" United States v. Tracy, 12 F.3d 1186, 1196 (2d Cir. 1993). A cursory review of the discovery produced related to one purported co-conspirator demonstrates the folly of proceeding as the government persists.\n\n[REDACTED TEXT BLOCK]\n\nThe government failed to follow the Court's Order and fails to explain why it did not disclose the statements as ordered. Accordingly, the Court should prohibit introduction of any alleged co-conspirator statements at trial.\n\n5\n\nDOJ-OGR-00005966",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 398 Filed 10/29/21 Page 11 of 52",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "D. There are Substantial Issues with the Government's Anticipated Position",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "For a statement to fall within the definition of Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(2)(E), \"a court must find (1) that there was a conspiracy, (2) that its members included the declarant and the party against whom the statement is offered, and (3) that the statement was made both (a) during the course of and (b) in furtherance of the conspiracy.\" United States v. Tracy, 12 F.3d 1186, 1196 (2d Cir. 1993). A cursory review of the discovery produced related to one purported co-conspirator demonstrates the folly of proceeding as the government persists.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "other",
      "content": "[REDACTED TEXT BLOCK]",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The government failed to follow the Court's Order and fails to explain why it did not disclose the statements as ordered. Accordingly, the Court should prohibit introduction of any alleged co-conspirator statements at trial.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "5",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005966",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [
      "Court"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "10/29/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "398",
      "DOJ-OGR-00005966"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document contains a redacted text block. The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case."
}