mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES001/DOJ-OGR-00000566.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "56",
    "document_number": "36",
    "date": "07/24/19",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 36 Filed 07/24/19 Page 56 of 74 56\n1 bracelet. It's just a head start.\n2 THE COURT: I was going to ask about that.\n3 So there is a suggestion in the bail package that two\n4 trustees would be living with him. I have not experienced\n5 anything like that before, either in reality or in an\n6 application.\n7 Mr. Weingarten reminds me that a representative of the\n8 company that has been approved by other courts for the security\n9 prong is here and could speak to that condition, whether it's a\n10 trustee condition or whether it's a private guard condition.\n11 But I did want to make one point about the law because\n12 I know your Honor knows the law better than I. Judge Bianco\n13 and your Honor and maybe several other judges are on one side\n14 of a debate. Judge Rakoff and maybe other judges on another.\n15 I read carefully the Second Circuit decisions. There\n16 are three of them. The most recent one actually is the\n17 Esposito decision where the court says that a private guard in\n18 that case is appropriate because he wouldn't be a flight risk\n19 but for his wealth.\n20 So there isn't this kind of invidious discrimination\n21 between somebody who is poor and someone who is wealthy because\n22 if a person is poor, even someone in Mr. Epstein's position,\n23 the government would not be making the same kind of flight\n24 arguments that are predicated upon his wealth.\n25 So they uphold the private guard saying it doesn't\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00000566",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 36 Filed 07/24/19 Page 56 of 74 56",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 bracelet. It's just a head start.\n2 THE COURT: I was going to ask about that.\n3 So there is a suggestion in the bail package that two\n4 trustees would be living with him. I have not experienced\n5 anything like that before, either in reality or in an\n6 application.\n7 Mr. Weingarten reminds me that a representative of the\n8 company that has been approved by other courts for the security\n9 prong is here and could speak to that condition, whether it's a\n10 trustee condition or whether it's a private guard condition.\n11 But I did want to make one point about the law because\n12 I know your Honor knows the law better than I. Judge Bianco\n13 and your Honor and maybe several other judges are on one side\n14 of a debate. Judge Rakoff and maybe other judges on another.\n15 I read carefully the Second Circuit decisions. There\n16 are three of them. The most recent one actually is the\n17 Esposito decision where the court says that a private guard in\n18 that case is appropriate because he wouldn't be a flight risk\n19 but for his wealth.\n20 So there isn't this kind of invidious discrimination\n21 between somebody who is poor and someone who is wealthy because\n22 if a person is poor, even someone in Mr. Epstein's position,\n23 the government would not be making the same kind of flight\n24 arguments that are predicated upon his wealth.\n25 So they uphold the private guard saying it doesn't",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00000566",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Mr. Weingarten",
      "Judge Bianco",
      "Judge Rakoff",
      "Mr. Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "07/24/19"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:19-cr-00490-RMB",
      "Document 36",
      "DOJ-OGR-00000566"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}