mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00009327.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "38",
    "document_number": "A-5723",
    "date": "08/24/22",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00336-PAE Document 616 Filed 08/24/22 Page 38 of 130 A-5723\n\nC2GFDAU1 Brune - direct 266\n1 Ms. Brune?\n2 THE WITNESS: I didn't, your Honor.\n3 THE COURT: Go ahead and complete your answer, please.\n4 A. We had a lot of Google-type information on a lot of different jurors. There were occasions where the information was obviously pertaining to the same person. That was fine.\n5 There was certainly situations where we were able to say, well, just not the same person and set it aside. I didn't sort of go to the judge each time and say, you know, Mr. Smith there says that he's -- and now I'm just giving the example -- a retired car mechanic, but I know there's a Mr. Smith who has some other occupation. I listened to the voir dire responses and I credited them.\n6 Q. The question, though, Ms. Brune, and just so I'm clear about what your testimony is, are you saying that you could not have asked Judge Pauley to ask the question, just a very specific question of the juror, right then and there?\n7 A. I certainly understood that I could have asked Judge Pauley to inquire.\n8 Q. And you didn't do that?\n9 A. I did not.\n10 Q. And you knew you could have done that, correct?\n11 A. Of course.\n12 Q. Now, you had ways to narrow down the information that you had, correct?\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n\nDOJ-OGR-00009327",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00336-PAE Document 616 Filed 08/24/22 Page 38 of 130 A-5723",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C2GFDAU1 Brune - direct 266",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 Ms. Brune?\n2 THE WITNESS: I didn't, your Honor.\n3 THE COURT: Go ahead and complete your answer, please.\n4 A. We had a lot of Google-type information on a lot of different jurors. There were occasions where the information was obviously pertaining to the same person. That was fine.\n5 There was certainly situations where we were able to say, well, just not the same person and set it aside. I didn't sort of go to the judge each time and say, you know, Mr. Smith there says that he's -- and now I'm just giving the example -- a retired car mechanic, but I know there's a Mr. Smith who has some other occupation. I listened to the voir dire responses and I credited them.\n6 Q. The question, though, Ms. Brune, and just so I'm clear about what your testimony is, are you saying that you could not have asked Judge Pauley to ask the question, just a very specific question of the juror, right then and there?\n7 A. I certainly understood that I could have asked Judge Pauley to inquire.\n8 Q. And you didn't do that?\n9 A. I did not.\n10 Q. And you knew you could have done that, correct?\n11 A. Of course.\n12 Q. Now, you had ways to narrow down the information that you had, correct?",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009327",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Brune",
      "Mr. Smith",
      "Judge Pauley"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/24/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 1:20-cr-00336-PAE",
      "Document 616",
      "A-5723",
      "DOJ-OGR-00009327"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with clear and legible text. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}