mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES003/DOJ-OGR-00007102.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "51",
    "document_number": "465",
    "date": "11/15/21",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 465 Filed 11/15/21 Page 51 of 127\nLB15MAX2\n1 co-conspirator statements that it intends to introduce at trial\n2 pursuant to 801(d)(2)(E) and specifically representative\n3 exemplars of each category whether by exhibit number or\n4 anticipated testimony. That is a process that I have used\n5 before, I think not infrequently used, in order to try to\n6 litigate anything that could be litigated. So the government\n7 will do that by November 4th. The defense, bearing fully in\n8 mind the well-established law regarding conditional admission\n9 of the co-conspirator statements, the defense should indicate\n10 to the government, by November 8, any good faith, non-frivolous\n11 objections to the introduction of any such statements. After\n12 conferring, if there are disputes remaining that wouldn't\n13 obviously fall into the law regarding conditional admission,\n14 the government shall file a letter, by November 10, justifying\n15 admission of exemplars and statements over which the parties\n16 disagree. So that's the 10th, and then the defense could put\n17 in an opposition, in writing, by November 12th.\n18 Any questions about that, Ms. Moe?\n19 MS. MOE: No, your Honor. Thank you.\n20 THE COURT: Ms. Sternheim?\n21 MR. PAGLIUCA: We are clear, your Honor. Thank you.\n22\n23 THE COURT: I think it is probably worth maybe just a\n24 moment, because it impacts this issue and some other ones, to\n25 just discuss one category of potential statements that's been\nflagged and that's alleged co-conspirator statements that date\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00007102",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 465 Filed 11/15/21 Page 51 of 127",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LB15MAX2\n1 co-conspirator statements that it intends to introduce at trial\n2 pursuant to 801(d)(2)(E) and specifically representative\n3 exemplars of each category whether by exhibit number or\n4 anticipated testimony. That is a process that I have used\n5 before, I think not infrequently used, in order to try to\n6 litigate anything that could be litigated. So the government\n7 will do that by November 4th. The defense, bearing fully in\n8 mind the well-established law regarding conditional admission\n9 of the co-conspirator statements, the defense should indicate\n10 to the government, by November 8, any good faith, non-frivolous\n11 objections to the introduction of any such statements. After\n12 conferring, if there are disputes remaining that wouldn't\n13 obviously fall into the law regarding conditional admission,\n14 the government shall file a letter, by November 10, justifying\n15 admission of exemplars and statements over which the parties\n16 disagree. So that's the 10th, and then the defense could put\n17 in an opposition, in writing, by November 12th.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "18 Any questions about that, Ms. Moe?\n19 MS. MOE: No, your Honor. Thank you.\n20 THE COURT: Ms. Sternheim?\n21 MR. PAGLIUCA: We are clear, your Honor. Thank you.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "22\n23 THE COURT: I think it is probably worth maybe just a\n24 moment, because it impacts this issue and some other ones, to\n25 just discuss one category of potential statements that's been\nflagged and that's alleged co-conspirator statements that date",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00007102",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Moe",
      "Ms. Sternheim",
      "MR. PAGLIUCA"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "November 4th",
      "November 8",
      "November 10",
      "November 12th",
      "11/15/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 465",
      "DOJ-OGR-00007102"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}