mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES006/DOJ-OGR-00015006.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "130",
    "document_number": "782",
    "date": "01/15/25",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 782 Filed 01/15/25 Page 130 of 158 130 LBAGmax4 Rocchio - Cross 1 conclusion of the study, no. 2 Q. Well, are you just saying you ignore the conclusion of the author who did this study because you don't agree with it? 3 A. I'm not saying this is the conclusion. The purpose of the 4 study -- a conclusion generally refers to the concluding 5 comments summarizing the main findings of the study. So this 6 is actually not part of her -- their conclusion. It's part of 7 their rationale for why this particular piece of research is 8 important and needed in the field. 9 10 Q. So let's go through the methodology of this particular 11 study as well. 12 THE COURT: We'll take about a 20-minute, 30-minute 13 break for lunch. It's 12:55, I think we probably need 30 14 minutes, just logistically, so we'll resume at 1:25. 15 I do want to encourage you, Mr. Pagliuca, to focus 16 your cross less on what you might do in front of a jury -- 17 because you are ably demonstrating to me so far that the points 18 you made in your papers are cross-examination points -- so to 19 the extent there are any of the opinions you want to focus on 20 the underlying Daubert questions -- and you did a little bit at 21 the end here -- the time would be much more effectively used. 22 MR. PAGLIUCA: Understood, your Honor. 23 THE COURT: Thank you. We'll resume in 30 minutes. 24 (Luncheon recess) 25 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00015006",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 782 Filed 01/15/25 Page 130 of 158 130 LBAGmax4 Rocchio - Cross",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 conclusion of the study, no. 2 Q. Well, are you just saying you ignore the conclusion of the author who did this study because you don't agree with it? 3 A. I'm not saying this is the conclusion. The purpose of the 4 study -- a conclusion generally refers to the concluding 5 comments summarizing the main findings of the study. So this 6 is actually not part of her -- their conclusion. It's part of 7 their rationale for why this particular piece of research is 8 important and needed in the field. 9 10 Q. So let's go through the methodology of this particular 11 study as well. 12 THE COURT: We'll take about a 20-minute, 30-minute 13 break for lunch. It's 12:55, I think we probably need 30 14 minutes, just logistically, so we'll resume at 1:25. 15 I do want to encourage you, Mr. Pagliuca, to focus 16 your cross less on what you might do in front of a jury -- 17 because you are ably demonstrating to me so far that the points 18 you made in your papers are cross-examination points -- so to 19 the extent there are any of the opinions you want to focus on 20 the underlying Daubert questions -- and you did a little bit at 21 the end here -- the time would be much more effectively used. 22 MR. PAGLIUCA: Understood, your Honor. 23 THE COURT: Thank you. We'll resume in 30 minutes. 24 (Luncheon recess) 25",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00015006",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Pagliuca"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "01/15/25"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "782",
      "DOJ-OGR-00015006"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}