mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00011647.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "26 of 43",
    "document_number": "739",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 739 Filed 08/10/22 Page 26 of 43 26\nLBNAMAXTps\n1 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes. The government believes that its notice, in combination with its 3500 materials and the cases it's pointed the defense to, should give the defense an understanding of Mr. Flatley's opinions, to the extent that they're expert opinions at all and not just fact opinions.\n2 THE COURT: Well --\n3 MR. ROHRBACH: Your Honor, my point is that Ms. Menninger says that she would have her expert review Mr. Flatley's testimony in other cases to see if there are opinions he disagreed with, and I just wanted to clarify that the defense expert should review the material the government has provided them.\n4 THE COURT: That's fine, but it's your notice that sets up the opinions that your expert is offering.\n5 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor.\n6 THE COURT: So what they should do is look at the notice, and if their expert has different views than what's in the notice, they should provide those views.\n7 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor.\n8 THE COURT: If your notice is insufficient under Rule 16 to tell us now what opinions your expert is going to provide, then you may have problems down the road. But I'm not going to have them held to a different standard than what the government has done here.\n9 MR. ROHRBACH: Of course, your Honor.\n10 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n11 DOJ-OGR-00011647",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 739 Filed 08/10/22 Page 26 of 43 26",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LBNAMAXTps",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes. The government believes that its notice, in combination with its 3500 materials and the cases it's pointed the defense to, should give the defense an understanding of Mr. Flatley's opinions, to the extent that they're expert opinions at all and not just fact opinions.\n2 THE COURT: Well --\n3 MR. ROHRBACH: Your Honor, my point is that Ms. Menninger says that she would have her expert review Mr. Flatley's testimony in other cases to see if there are opinions he disagreed with, and I just wanted to clarify that the defense expert should review the material the government has provided them.\n4 THE COURT: That's fine, but it's your notice that sets up the opinions that your expert is offering.\n5 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor.\n6 THE COURT: So what they should do is look at the notice, and if their expert has different views than what's in the notice, they should provide those views.\n7 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor.\n8 THE COURT: If your notice is insufficient under Rule 16 to tell us now what opinions your expert is going to provide, then you may have problems down the road. But I'm not going to have them held to a different standard than what the government has done here.\n9 MR. ROHRBACH: Of course, your Honor.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00011647",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. ROHRBACH",
      "Mr. Flatley",
      "Ms. Menninger"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "739",
      "DOJ-OGR-00011647"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}