mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES006/DOJ-OGR-00016740.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "11",
    "document_number": "763",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 11 of 197 2552\n\n1 defense case. We noted early last week that we were going to\n2 rest. We rested on Friday. They then had five full days,\n3 including three business days, to prepare. So we would object\n4 to holding the case over to Monday for a new witness.\n5 MR. EVERDELL: This is a witness that is\n6 extraordinarily relevant and sometimes things develop during\n7 trial and we need to get witnesses to address issues that come\n8 up at trial. We were able to find this person and he's willing\n9 to come, even though he's 81, because he wants to come and\n10 provide this testimony if it's required.\n11 This is extraordinarily relevant, especially with the\n12 issue that came up with the property records and the issue\n13 raised to the Court. He can directly speak to that issue. His\n14 testimony is relevant for a critical issue in this case, which\n15 is whether or not this -- the events that Kate described could\n16 have even taken place at the time they took place, which she\n17 alleges they took place in, and he should be heard.\n18 MS. COMEY: Your Honor, I just note this is the\n19 defense's third bite of this particular apple and it emphasizes\n20 the prejudice to us of delayed disclosure. We will have no\n21 opportunity to investigate further at this point.\n22 THE COURT: I mean, what we talked about yesterday was\n23 inclusion of documents that show ownership; right?\n24 MR. EVERDELL: That's correct, your Honor.\n25 THE COURT: And I think I said those could come in.\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00016740",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 11 of 197 2552",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00016740",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 defense case. We noted early last week that we were going to\n2 rest. We rested on Friday. They then had five full days,\n3 including three business days, to prepare. So we would object\n4 to holding the case over to Monday for a new witness.\n5 MR. EVERDELL: This is a witness that is\n6 extraordinarily relevant and sometimes things develop during\n7 trial and we need to get witnesses to address issues that come\n8 up at trial. We were able to find this person and he's willing\n9 to come, even though he's 81, because he wants to come and\n10 provide this testimony if it's required.\n11 This is extraordinarily relevant, especially with the\n12 issue that came up with the property records and the issue\n13 raised to the Court. He can directly speak to that issue. His\n14 testimony is relevant for a critical issue in this case, which\n15 is whether or not this -- the events that Kate described could\n16 have even taken place at the time they took place, which she\n17 alleges they took place in, and he should be heard.\n18 MS. COMEY: Your Honor, I just note this is the\n19 defense's third bite of this particular apple and it emphasizes\n20 the prejudice to us of delayed disclosure. We will have no\n21 opportunity to investigate further at this point.\n22 THE COURT: I mean, what we talked about yesterday was\n23 inclusion of documents that show ownership; right?\n24 MR. EVERDELL: That's correct, your Honor.\n25 THE COURT: And I think I said those could come in.",
      "position": "main content"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. EVERDELL",
      "MS. COMEY",
      "Kate"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "763",
      "DOJ-OGR-00016740"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}