mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00010194.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "10",
    "document_number": "604",
    "date": "03/16/13",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 604 Filed 03/16/13 Page 10 of 14\n\nZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP\n\nThe Honorable William H. Pauley, III\nMarch 7, 2013\nPage 10\n\nlosses in the prior year (e.g., 2001). The prosecution focused on those transactions in its summations, as did the jury in its deliberations.6\n\nE. Guidelines Calculation\n\nIn its preliminary Report, the Probation Office calculates an offense level of 40 and a Guidelines range of 292 to 365 months. It assumes a tax loss amount of $1.5 billion and adds \"points\" for sophisticated means (§ 2T1.1(b)(2)) and special skill (§ 3B1.3). We have written to Probation and asked it to reconsider that calculation. Under the Court's rules, its final Report is due after ours, and so we summarize here our argument that the Guidelines range should be far lower than where Probation has preliminarily put it.\n\n6 Juror No. 1's letter to AUSA Okula goes far to show that David's conviction was only for the \"backdating\" transactions:\n\n[W]e did have qualms with Mr. David Parse. I solely held out for two days on the conspiracy charge for him -- I wanted to convict 100% (not only on that charge) -- but on Tuesday, May 24, 2011, we had asked for the Judge's clarification of \"willfully\" and \"knowingly\", I believe, and I had to throw in the towel. I did fight the good fight, however, and I felt that Mr. Parse played his integral part and was a key element in the elaborate scheme/scam. The backdating was enough for the other charges.\n\nLetter of Catherine Conrad 5/25/11 (emphasis added).\n\nDOJ-OGR-00010194",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 604 Filed 03/16/13 Page 10 of 14",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Honorable William H. Pauley, III\nMarch 7, 2013\nPage 10",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "losses in the prior year (e.g., 2001). The prosecution focused on those transactions in its summations, as did the jury in its deliberations.6",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "E. Guidelines Calculation",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "In its preliminary Report, the Probation Office calculates an offense level of 40 and a Guidelines range of 292 to 365 months. It assumes a tax loss amount of $1.5 billion and adds \"points\" for sophisticated means (§ 2T1.1(b)(2)) and special skill (§ 3B1.3). We have written to Probation and asked it to reconsider that calculation. Under the Court's rules, its final Report is due after ours, and so we summarize here our argument that the Guidelines range should be far lower than where Probation has preliminarily put it.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "6 Juror No. 1's letter to AUSA Okula goes far to show that David's conviction was only for the \"backdating\" transactions:",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "[W]e did have qualms with Mr. David Parse. I solely held out for two days on the conspiracy charge for him -- I wanted to convict 100% (not only on that charge) -- but on Tuesday, May 24, 2011, we had asked for the Judge's clarification of \"willfully\" and \"knowingly\", I believe, and I had to throw in the towel. I did fight the good fight, however, and I felt that Mr. Parse played his integral part and was a key element in the elaborate scheme/scam. The backdating was enough for the other charges.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Letter of Catherine Conrad 5/25/11 (emphasis added).",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00010194",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "William H. Pauley, III",
      "David Parse",
      "Catherine Conrad",
      "Okula"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP",
      "Probation Office"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "March 7, 2013",
      "May 24, 2011",
      "5/25/11",
      "03/16/13",
      "2001"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:09-cr-00581-WHP",
      "Document 604",
      "DOJ-OGR-00010194"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case. It includes a discussion of the guidelines calculation and a quote from a juror's letter. The document is well-formatted and free of significant damage or redactions."
}