mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00009515.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "10",
    "document_number": "604",
    "date": "03/16/13",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 161 Filed 02/24/22 Page 98 of 117 A-5939 Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 604 Filed 03/16/13 Page 10 of 14 ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP The Honorable William H. Pauley, III March 7, 2013 Page 10 losses in the prior year (e.g., 2001). The prosecution focused on those transactions in its summations, as did the jury in its deliberations.6 E. Guidelines Calculation In its preliminary Report, the Probation Office calculates an offense level of 40 and a Guidelines range of 292 to 365 months. It assumes a tax loss amount of $1.5 billion and adds \"points\" for sophisticated means (§ 2T1.1(b)(2)) and special skill (§ 3B1.3). We have written to Probation and asked it to reconsider that calculation. Under the Court's rules, its final Report is due after ours, and so we summarize here our argument that the Guidelines range should be far lower than where Probation has preliminarily put it. 6 Juror No. 1's letter to AUSA Okula goes far to show that David's conviction was only for the \"backdating\" transactions: [W]e did have qualms with Mr. David Parse. I solely held out for two days on the conspiracy charge for him -- I wanted to convict 100% (not only on that charge) -- but on Tuesday, May 24, 2011, we had asked for the Judge's clarification of \"willfully\" and \"knowingly\", I believe, and I had to throw in the towel. I did fight the good fight, however, and I felt that Mr. Parse played his integral part and was a key element in the elaborate scheme/scam. The backdating was enough for the other charges. Letter of Catherine Conrad 5/25/11 (emphasis added). DOJ-OGR-00009515",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 161 Filed 02/24/22 Page 98 of 117 A-5939",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 604 Filed 03/16/13 Page 10 of 14",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Honorable William H. Pauley, III March 7, 2013 Page 10",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "losses in the prior year (e.g., 2001). The prosecution focused on those transactions in its summations, as did the jury in its deliberations.6 E. Guidelines Calculation In its preliminary Report, the Probation Office calculates an offense level of 40 and a Guidelines range of 292 to 365 months. It assumes a tax loss amount of $1.5 billion and adds \"points\" for sophisticated means (§ 2T1.1(b)(2)) and special skill (§ 3B1.3). We have written to Probation and asked it to reconsider that calculation. Under the Court's rules, its final Report is due after ours, and so we summarize here our argument that the Guidelines range should be far lower than where Probation has preliminarily put it.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "6 Juror No. 1's letter to AUSA Okula goes far to show that David's conviction was only for the \"backdating\" transactions: [W]e did have qualms with Mr. David Parse. I solely held out for two days on the conspiracy charge for him -- I wanted to convict 100% (not only on that charge) -- but on Tuesday, May 24, 2011, we had asked for the Judge's clarification of \"willfully\" and \"knowingly\", I believe, and I had to throw in the towel. I did fight the good fight, however, and I felt that Mr. Parse played his integral part and was a key element in the elaborate scheme/scam. The backdating was enough for the other charges. Letter of Catherine Conrad 5/25/11 (emphasis added).",
      "position": "footnote"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009515",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "William H. Pauley, III",
      "David Parse",
      "Catherine Conrad"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP",
      "Probation Office"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "March 7, 2013",
      "May 24, 2011",
      "5/25/11",
      "03/16/13",
      "02/24/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 161",
      "A-5939",
      "Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP",
      "Document 604",
      "DOJ-OGR-00009515"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a case involving David Parse. The text includes legal terminology and references to specific court documents and guidelines."
}