mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES006/DOJ-OGR-00017281.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "3",
    "document_number": "769",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 769 Filed 08/10/22 Page 3 of 19 3094 LCLVMAXT\n\nProposals for how to respond.\n\nMS. COMEY: Your Honor, I believe a note saying that that document is not in evidence would be an appropriate response.\n\nMR. PAGLIUCA: Your Honor, I think since there was impeachment from the document -- I agree it's not a deposition, and I agree that the document is not in evidence. But there is 613 impeachment from that document. I think the Court -- and Ms. Sternheim tells me what I was about to say, which is good; we're consistent.\n\nI think something like, you know, You have the evidence and testimony relating to 3505-005. That's it. I don't think that there should be any further discussion about what is or is not in evidence.\n\nTHE COURT: How about \"all admitted exhibits are before you.\"\n\nMS. COMEY: I think that's fine, your Honor.\n\nMR. PAGLIUCA: The problem, your Honor, is that there's testimony about it.\n\nTHE COURT: You lost your mic.\n\nMR. PAGLIUCA: Sorry.\n\nThere's testimony about it.\n\nTHE COURT: It's true they've not asked for that though.\n\nMR. PAGLIUCA: They do have the transcript where it's\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\n\nDOJ-OGR-00017281",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 769 Filed 08/10/22 Page 3 of 19 3094 LCLVMAXT",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Proposals for how to respond.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "MS. COMEY: Your Honor, I believe a note saying that that document is not in evidence would be an appropriate response.\n\nMR. PAGLIUCA: Your Honor, I think since there was impeachment from the document -- I agree it's not a deposition, and I agree that the document is not in evidence. But there is 613 impeachment from that document. I think the Court -- and Ms. Sternheim tells me what I was about to say, which is good; we're consistent.\n\nI think something like, you know, You have the evidence and testimony relating to 3505-005. That's it. I don't think that there should be any further discussion about what is or is not in evidence.\n\nTHE COURT: How about \"all admitted exhibits are before you.\"\n\nMS. COMEY: I think that's fine, your Honor.\n\nMR. PAGLIUCA: The problem, your Honor, is that there's testimony about it.\n\nTHE COURT: You lost your mic.\n\nMR. PAGLIUCA: Sorry.\n\nThere's testimony about it.\n\nTHE COURT: It's true they've not asked for that though.\n\nMR. PAGLIUCA: They do have the transcript where it's",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00017281",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MS. COMEY",
      "MR. PAGLIUCA",
      "MS. STERNHEIM"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "769",
      "3505-005",
      "613",
      "DOJ-OGR-00017281"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}