mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00013560.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "19",
    "document_number": "757",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 757 Filed 08/10/22 Page 19 of 49 1992 LC9VMAXT\n1 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor. The government has a few proposed redactions to its letter; so we will propose those redactions and docket a version that implements those redactions subject to the Court's ruling on them.\n2 THE COURT: Okay. Remember, my basic view is get it on the docket and then propose your redactions so that I'm not -- put it on the docket with your proposed redactions and I'll let you know if it should be redacted less.\n3 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor. And we will do that today.\n4 THE COURT: Okay. And same for -- I think you were just waiting to see if the government had proposed redactions, is that --\n5 MR. PAGLIUCA: That's correct, your Honor.\n6 I think we can mirror the government's redactions. I have to just think about whether the Exhibit A, I think it was, that was attached and then responded to, I think we need to think about how that gets redacted. And I think likely my view would be the entirety of it gets redacted.\n7 THE COURT: Okay. I will consider that.\n8 Anything else?\n9 MR. ROHRBACH: Nothing from the government.\n10 MR. EVERDELL: No, your Honor.\n11 THE COURT: All right. We're missing a couple jurors, but I suspect they'll be here soon.\n12 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 757 Filed 08/10/22 Page 19 of 49 1992 LC9VMAXT",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor. The government has a few proposed redactions to its letter; so we will propose those redactions and docket a version that implements those redactions subject to the Court's ruling on them.\n2 THE COURT: Okay. Remember, my basic view is get it on the docket and then propose your redactions so that I'm not -- put it on the docket with your proposed redactions and I'll let you know if it should be redacted less.\n3 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor. And we will do that today.\n4 THE COURT: Okay. And same for -- I think you were just waiting to see if the government had proposed redactions, is that --\n5 MR. PAGLIUCA: That's correct, your Honor.\n6 I think we can mirror the government's redactions. I have to just think about whether the Exhibit A, I think it was, that was attached and then responded to, I think we need to think about how that gets redacted. And I think likely my view would be the entirety of it gets redacted.\n7 THE COURT: Okay. I will consider that.\n8 Anything else?\n9 MR. ROHRBACH: Nothing from the government.\n10 MR. EVERDELL: No, your Honor.\n11 THE COURT: All right. We're missing a couple jurors, but I suspect they'll be here soon.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. ROHRBACH",
      "THE COURT",
      "MR. PAGLIUCA",
      "MR. EVERDELL"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "757",
      "1992",
      "LC9VMAXT",
      "(212) 805-0300"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and readable format. There are no visible redactions or damage to the document."
}