mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00009363.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "74",
    "document_number": "A-5759",
    "date": "02/24/22",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 161 Filed 02/24/22 Page 74 of 130\nA-5759\nC2grdau2 Brune - direct 302\ngovernment and the Court accurately when the issue was presented.\nQ. Is that the ethical standard that governed you when you were an AUSA, Ms. Brune?\nA. That I was supposed to raise the other side's point in my brief when I didn't know what position they were taking? I don't think that governs any Assistant U.S. Attorney.\nNo, I think it is really more that you were willing to lay out the accurate set of facts if and only if the government would ask you to do so.\nA. We've already talked about the brief and how I in some respects missed the issue, which I regret. Of course, both defense counsel AUSA's are obliged to lay things out for the court accurately. It is something that throughout my career I have always strived to do.\nQ. But for the Court's pressing and the government's pressing, you would have never disclosed those facts to the government, isn't that right, Ms. Brune?\nA. If the government chose not to raise the waiver issue, and as I thought about it I actually thought that the government had far more information or at least had access to far more information, my sense at the time was that the government had probably Googled her, too. But I thought that if the government chose to make it an issue, I was prepared to respond and respond accurately, which I tried very hard to do.\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00009363",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 161 Filed 02/24/22 Page 74 of 130",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A-5759",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C2grdau2 Brune - direct 302",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "government and the Court accurately when the issue was presented.\nQ. Is that the ethical standard that governed you when you were an AUSA, Ms. Brune?\nA. That I was supposed to raise the other side's point in my brief when I didn't know what position they were taking? I don't think that governs any Assistant U.S. Attorney.\nNo, I think it is really more that you were willing to lay out the accurate set of facts if and only if the government would ask you to do so.\nA. We've already talked about the brief and how I in some respects missed the issue, which I regret. Of course, both defense counsel AUSA's are obliged to lay things out for the court accurately. It is something that throughout my career I have always strived to do.\nQ. But for the Court's pressing and the government's pressing, you would have never disclosed those facts to the government, isn't that right, Ms. Brune?\nA. If the government chose not to raise the waiver issue, and as I thought about it I actually thought that the government had far more information or at least had access to far more information, my sense at the time was that the government had probably Googled her, too. But I thought that if the government chose to make it an issue, I was prepared to respond and respond accurately, which I tried very hard to do.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009363",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Brune",
      "Ms. Brune"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "02/24/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00338-PAE",
      "A-5759",
      "DOJ-OGR-00009363"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}