mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES006/DOJ-OGR-00016659.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "176",
    "document_number": "761",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 761 Filed 08/10/22 Page 176 of 246 2471 LCGVMAX5 Loftus - cross\n1 of doing it. And I think this is analogous to that, if not exactly the same.\n2\n3 MS. POMERANTZ: Your Honor, this witness has testified about her extensive findings on memory that are based on multiple experiments. This is one of the experiments, so they asked her about certain experiments on direct examination.\n4\n5 This is one of the studies that she herself conducted, and so I don't see how this is a parallel question. It's presented for the Court.\n6\n7 This is part of the experiments that she used and that she conducted that forms the basis of her opinions.\n8\n9 MR. PAGLIUCA: I think part of the analysis -- I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off, if you were finished.\n10\n11 MS. POMERANTZ: It's quite distinct from Dr. Rocchio, who wasn't testifying. That was something, as your Honor pointed out, that the defense is trying to introduce for cross-examination, and it wasn't an article that she had written. It's quite distinct.\n12\n13 THE COURT: Overruled.\n14 (Continued on next page)\n15\n16\n17\n18\n19\n20\n21\n22\n23\n24\n25\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00016659",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 761 Filed 08/10/22 Page 176 of 246 2471 LCGVMAX5 Loftus - cross",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "of doing it. And I think this is analogous to that, if not exactly the same.\nMS. POMERANTZ: Your Honor, this witness has testified about her extensive findings on memory that are based on multiple experiments. This is one of the experiments, so they asked her about certain experiments on direct examination.\nThis is one of the studies that she herself conducted, and so I don't see how this is a parallel question. It's presented for the Court. This is part of the experiments that she used and that she conducted that forms the basis of her opinions.\nMR. PAGLIUCA: I think part of the analysis -- I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off, if you were finished.\nMS. POMERANTZ: It's quite distinct from Dr. Rocchio, who wasn't testifying. That was something, as your Honor pointed out, that the defense is trying to introduce for cross-examination, and it wasn't an article that she had written. It's quite distinct.\nTHE COURT: Overruled.\n(Continued on next page)",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00016659",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MS. POMERANTZ",
      "MR. PAGLIUCA",
      "Dr. Rocchio"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "761",
      "2471",
      "DOJ-OGR-00016659",
      "(212) 805-0300"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}