DOJ-OGR-00009379.json 4.0 KB

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859
  1. {
  2. "document_metadata": {
  3. "page_number": "90",
  4. "document_number": "1616620",
  5. "date": "02/24/22",
  6. "document_type": "Court Document",
  7. "has_handwriting": false,
  8. "has_stamps": false
  9. },
  10. "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 1616620 Filed 02/24/22 Page 90 of 130\nA-5775\n\nC2GFDAU3 Brune - recross 318\n1 thinking about, well, what will happen if nobody ever raises\n2 it. But if nobody ever raised it, I don't think that I would\n3 have even been acting ethically if I said on behalf of my\n4 client, hey, here's an argument I don't even think is\n5 meritorious but the government has omitted to raise it so I on\n6 the defense side will raise it.\n7 THE COURT: All right. Any further inquiries?\n8 Ms. Davis or Mr. Schectman?\n9 MS. DAVIS: Can I have one brief followup on that,\n10 your Honor?\n11 THE COURT: Yes.\n12 MS. DAVIS: Can I just do it from right here?\n13 THE COURT: Yes.\n14 REDIRECT EXAMINATION\n15 BY MS. DAVIS:\n16 Q. Are you talking about facts or argument, Ms. Brune, when\n17 you say you wouldn't have -- are you saying you would not have\n18 disclosed the underlying facts or wouldn't have made the legal\n19 argument?\n20 A. If it was put in issue by the Court or by the government, I\n21 would have done and in fact did do what I did. It's a little\n22 tangled up. What I'm trying to say is, I would have laid it\n23 out, which is what I did.\n24 Q. The facts, though?\n25 A. Well, I also try to lay out the applicable law. I'm not\n SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n (212) 805-0300\n\nDOJ-OGR-00009379",
  11. "text_blocks": [
  12. {
  13. "type": "printed",
  14. "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 1616620 Filed 02/24/22 Page 90 of 130",
  15. "position": "header"
  16. },
  17. {
  18. "type": "handwritten",
  19. "content": "A-5775",
  20. "position": "header"
  21. },
  22. {
  23. "type": "printed",
  24. "content": "C2GFDAU3 Brune - recross 318\n1 thinking about, well, what will happen if nobody ever raises\n2 it. But if nobody ever raised it, I don't think that I would\n3 have even been acting ethically if I said on behalf of my\n4 client, hey, here's an argument I don't even think is\n5 meritorious but the government has omitted to raise it so I on\n6 the defense side will raise it.\n7 THE COURT: All right. Any further inquiries?\n8 Ms. Davis or Mr. Schectman?\n9 MS. DAVIS: Can I have one brief followup on that,\n10 your Honor?\n11 THE COURT: Yes.\n12 MS. DAVIS: Can I just do it from right here?\n13 THE COURT: Yes.\n14 REDIRECT EXAMINATION\n15 BY MS. DAVIS:\n16 Q. Are you talking about facts or argument, Ms. Brune, when\n17 you say you wouldn't have -- are you saying you would not have\n18 disclosed the underlying facts or wouldn't have made the legal\n19 argument?\n20 A. If it was put in issue by the Court or by the government, I\n21 would have done and in fact did do what I did. It's a little\n22 tangled up. What I'm trying to say is, I would have laid it\n23 out, which is what I did.\n24 Q. The facts, though?\n25 A. Well, I also try to lay out the applicable law. I'm not",
  25. "position": "main"
  26. },
  27. {
  28. "type": "printed",
  29. "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
  30. "position": "footer"
  31. },
  32. {
  33. "type": "printed",
  34. "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009379",
  35. "position": "footer"
  36. }
  37. ],
  38. "entities": {
  39. "people": [
  40. "Ms. Brune",
  41. "Ms. Davis",
  42. "Mr. Schectman"
  43. ],
  44. "organizations": [
  45. "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
  46. ],
  47. "locations": [],
  48. "dates": [
  49. "02/24/22"
  50. ],
  51. "reference_numbers": [
  52. "1:20-cr-00338-PAE",
  53. "1616620",
  54. "A-5775",
  55. "DOJ-OGR-00009379"
  56. ]
  57. },
  58. "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
  59. }