| 123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051 |
- {
- "document_metadata": {
- "page_number": "33",
- "document_number": "93",
- "date": "12/10/20",
- "document_type": "court transcript",
- "has_handwriting": false,
- "has_stamps": false
- },
- "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 93 Filed 12/10/20 Page 33 of 91 33\n1 information. So we were first notified about the circumstances\n2 the morning of the defendant's arrest, but I wanted to\n3 personally confer with the agent who was involved in breaching\n4 the door and verify that before including that information in a\n5 brief before the court. That's the reason for the delay, your\n6 Honor.\n7 THE COURT: Okay. But the government has done that\n8 confirmation process and is confident of the information\n9 provided and the basic contention there is -- the basic\n10 contention there is that she resisted opening the door in the\n11 face of being informed that authorities were seeking entry and\n12 there is a suggestion of an effort to conceal location\n13 monitoring of some type by placing a cell phone in foil of some\n14 kind.\n15 Could you explain what the government's understanding\n16 factually is and what you think I should derive from that?\n17 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\n18 And, with apologies, we were very careful to make sure\n19 that the specific language in our briefing was accurate in\n20 consultation with the agents, so I don't want to add additional\n21 facts or speak extemporaneously about that, but, in short, that\n22 is correct that the defendant did not respond to law\n23 enforcement announcing their presence and directing her to open\n24 the door; that, instead, she left and went into a separate\n25 room.\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00001910",
- "text_blocks": [
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 93 Filed 12/10/20 Page 33 of 91 33",
- "position": "header"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "1 information. So we were first notified about the circumstances\n2 the morning of the defendant's arrest, but I wanted to\n3 personally confer with the agent who was involved in breaching\n4 the door and verify that before including that information in a\n5 brief before the court. That's the reason for the delay, your\n6 Honor.\n7 THE COURT: Okay. But the government has done that\n8 confirmation process and is confident of the information\n9 provided and the basic contention there is -- the basic\n10 contention there is that she resisted opening the door in the\n11 face of being informed that authorities were seeking entry and\n12 there is a suggestion of an effort to conceal location\n13 monitoring of some type by placing a cell phone in foil of some\n14 kind.\n15 Could you explain what the government's understanding\n16 factually is and what you think I should derive from that?\n17 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor.\n18 And, with apologies, we were very careful to make sure\n19 that the specific language in our briefing was accurate in\n20 consultation with the agents, so I don't want to add additional\n21 facts or speak extemporaneously about that, but, in short, that\n22 is correct that the defendant did not respond to law\n23 enforcement announcing their presence and directing her to open\n24 the door; that, instead, she left and went into a separate\n25 room.",
- "position": "main content"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
- "position": "footer"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "DOJ-OGR-00001910",
- "position": "footer"
- }
- ],
- "entities": {
- "people": [
- "MS. MOE"
- ],
- "organizations": [
- "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
- ],
- "locations": [],
- "dates": [
- "12/10/20"
- ],
- "reference_numbers": [
- "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
- "93",
- "DOJ-OGR-00001910"
- ]
- },
- "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with clear and legible text. There are no visible redactions or damage."
- }
|