mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES008/DOJ-OGR-00022006.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "3",
    "document_number": "26",
    "date": "02/10/20",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT Document 26 Filed 02/10/20 Page 3 of 15 3\nown investigation, which can't really fully get started until\nwe appreciate what information has already been provided.\nThat's really the crux of the reason.\nNow, I noted in the government's opposition, although\nthey agree that some adjournment is warranted, I guess the\nissue is of how long the adjournment should be. The defense is\nin the best position to assess how much time we need to perform\nour important function on behalf of our clients. I say that\nbecause we are not making a request for the purpose of simply\ndelaying the proceedings. We are doing it because it is\nactually necessary to accomplish our goals as counsel.\nAlso, which I did not reference in my letter, is it\nalso takes into account my trial schedule, at least why my\nrequest was. Last week, I was scheduled to start a trial\nbefore Judge Ramos in 40 Foley Square in July. And part of\nwhat I discussed with Judge Ramos in setting that trial date\nwas that I knew that this trial may need to be accommodated in\nsome way. He selected July 20 for that date mostly because of\nthe court's availability at that time. That's also part of the\nreason. And in that particular case, my client's been\nincarcerated for almost two years. He is facing a mandatory\nlife sentence. So I do need to spend some of my time getting\nready for that as well, and I expect that to be our trial date.\nTHE COURT: What's the date?\nMR. FOY: What's the date?\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00022006",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT Document 26 Filed 02/10/20 Page 3 of 15 3",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "own investigation, which can't really fully get started until\nwe appreciate what information has already been provided.\nThat's really the crux of the reason.\nNow, I noted in the government's opposition, although\nthey agree that some adjournment is warranted, I guess the\nissue is of how long the adjournment should be. The defense is\nin the best position to assess how much time we need to perform\nour important function on behalf of our clients. I say that\nbecause we are not making a request for the purpose of simply\ndelaying the proceedings. We are doing it because it is\nactually necessary to accomplish our goals as counsel.\nAlso, which I did not reference in my letter, is it\nalso takes into account my trial schedule, at least why my\nrequest was. Last week, I was scheduled to start a trial\nbefore Judge Ramos in 40 Foley Square in July. And part of\nwhat I discussed with Judge Ramos in setting that trial date\nwas that I knew that this trial may need to be accommodated in\nsome way. He selected July 20 for that date mostly because of\nthe court's availability at that time. That's also part of the\nreason. And in that particular case, my client's been\nincarcerated for almost two years. He is facing a mandatory\nlife sentence. So I do need to spend some of my time getting\nready for that as well, and I expect that to be our trial date.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: What's the date?\nMR. FOY: What's the date?",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00022006",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Judge Ramos",
      "MR. FOY"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "40 Foley Square"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "02/10/20",
      "July 20"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:19-cr-00830-AT",
      "Document 26",
      "DOJ-OGR-00022006"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}