mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES006/DOJ-OGR-00016765.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "36",
    "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 36 of 197 2577 LCFCmax1\n\n1 the agent and just elicit from the agent that there were no phone records because phone records get deleted after a certain amount of time, but I believe they tried to get phone records, but none existed because of the age of the allegations. I mean, geo location, I think anybody who could testify to the fact that there aren't geo location -- the information, especially an FBI agent because cellphones didn't exist back then, there weren't records available back then. And emails, too, that there were no emails to get because of the age of the case. That's all I'm trying to do with that point, your Honor, is elicit the absence of evidence so that we can then argue it in front of the jury.\n\nMR. ROHRBACH: Your Honor, they don't have to elicit the absence of evidence in order to argue to the jury that the evidence is absent. So to the extent they are trying to elicit the absence of evidence through Special Agent Young is just the argument they want to make in closing made through leading questions on direct examination of a federal law enforcement agent.\n\nTHE COURT: I'm just going to reread the relevant portion of the transcript. I will take them as they come, but my instinct is the government is correct, you're either violating my rule or you're being argumentative in a way that you can argue from an absence in closing.\n\nMR. EVERDELL: Your Honor --\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n\nDOJ-OGR-00016765",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 36 of 197 2577 LCFCmax1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 the agent and just elicit from the agent that there were no phone records because phone records get deleted after a certain amount of time, but I believe they tried to get phone records, but none existed because of the age of the allegations. I mean, geo location, I think anybody who could testify to the fact that there aren't geo location -- the information, especially an FBI agent because cellphones didn't exist back then, there weren't records available back then. And emails, too, that there were no emails to get because of the age of the case. That's all I'm trying to do with that point, your Honor, is elicit the absence of evidence so that we can then argue it in front of the jury.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "MR. ROHRBACH: Your Honor, they don't have to elicit the absence of evidence in order to argue to the jury that the evidence is absent. So to the extent they are trying to elicit the absence of evidence through Special Agent Young is just the argument they want to make in closing made through leading questions on direct examination of a federal law enforcement agent.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: I'm just going to reread the relevant portion of the transcript. I will take them as they come, but my instinct is the government is correct, you're either violating my rule or you're being argumentative in a way that you can argue from an absence in closing.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor --",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00016765",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "ROHRBACH",
      "EVERDELL",
      "Young"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "FBI",
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "763",
      "DOJ-OGR-00016765"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a discussion between the court and lawyers regarding the admissibility of evidence. The text is mostly printed, with no handwritten content or stamps visible."
}