mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00012032.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "12",
    "document_number": "745",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 745 Filed 08/10/22 Page 12 of 264 LC1VMAX1 418 that the witness couldn't recognize it, and there are other questions about admissibility than just whether it's relevant or impeaching, is that it wasn't a direct contradiction of anything the witness said on the stand; so it wasn't a proper basis for impeachment. And if it advanced the defense case in some other way, it would have been a Rule 16 -- THE COURT: What is the government's understanding of when the witness lived at the address that's referenced in the 302? MR. ROHRBACH: If I may ask Ms. Moe, who's taking the rest to answer that question. THE COURT: Sure. MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. I don't recall the particular date, but I think the witness was beginning to clarify on cross-examination yesterday that at some point while she was a teenager living in Palm Beach, she moved to the second address. I don't recall the specific date -- THE COURT: And you say the second address, what do you mean? MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. THE COURT: I guess what do you mean by the first address, do you mean the pool house? MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. I believe the witness would explain that at the time that all of this -- SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00012032",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 745 Filed 08/10/22 Page 12 of 264 LC1VMAX1 418",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "that the witness couldn't recognize it, and there are other questions about admissibility than just whether it's relevant or impeaching, is that it wasn't a direct contradiction of anything the witness said on the stand; so it wasn't a proper basis for impeachment. And if it advanced the defense case in some other way, it would have been a Rule 16 -- THE COURT: What is the government's understanding of when the witness lived at the address that's referenced in the 302? MR. ROHRBACH: If I may ask Ms. Moe, who's taking the rest to answer that question. THE COURT: Sure. MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. I don't recall the particular date, but I think the witness was beginning to clarify on cross-examination yesterday that at some point while she was a teenager living in Palm Beach, she moved to the second address. I don't recall the specific date -- THE COURT: And you say the second address, what do you mean? MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. THE COURT: I guess what do you mean by the first address, do you mean the pool house? MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. I believe the witness would explain that at the time that all of this --",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00012032",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Moe",
      "MR. ROHRBACH"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Palm Beach"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 745",
      "302",
      "DOJ-OGR-00012032"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and readable format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}