DOJ-OGR-00011652.json 3.9 KB

12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152
  1. {
  2. "document_metadata": {
  3. "page_number": "31",
  4. "document_number": "739",
  5. "date": "08/10/22",
  6. "document_type": "court transcript",
  7. "has_handwriting": false,
  8. "has_stamps": false
  9. },
  10. "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 739 Filed 08/10/22 Page 31 of 43 31 LBNAMAXTps\n\nTHE COURT: So we won't add \"solely,\" because we don't want to wrongly instruct the jury about the law. So we'll keep that one as it is.\n\nI need to think about the other one. In my mind, this is an issue that pertains -- I understand there's a witness where the only sexual conduct took place in New Mexico, and I had understood previously that that witness was above the age of consent in New Mexico, but that the government was offering that evidence as enticement to engage in illegal sexual conduct in New York. And that's what I was trying to capture in the instruction, so that that evidence could be relevant, the jury could see that evidence as relevant to the enticement to illegal sexual activity as defined under New York law, which is the only way that the government has charged this case, other than the trafficking count -- well, including the trafficking count, yes.\n\nAnd that's what I was trying to capture. And I'll consider the alterations you're suggesting. What we can't do is infuse the instruction with the government's case and arguments. The point here is just to make clear what the jurors can do and then, to the extent they otherwise deem the evidence relevant, they can consider it and we'll give them the charge at the end of the day. But I'll consider the suggestions. I haven't -- just haven't had time.\n\nAnything on that?\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n\nDOJ-OGR-00011652",
  11. "text_blocks": [
  12. {
  13. "type": "printed",
  14. "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 739 Filed 08/10/22 Page 31 of 43 31 LBNAMAXTps",
  15. "position": "header"
  16. },
  17. {
  18. "type": "printed",
  19. "content": "THE COURT: So we won't add \"solely,\" because we don't want to wrongly instruct the jury about the law. So we'll keep that one as it is.\n\nI need to think about the other one. In my mind, this is an issue that pertains -- I understand there's a witness where the only sexual conduct took place in New Mexico, and I had understood previously that that witness was above the age of consent in New Mexico, but that the government was offering that evidence as enticement to engage in illegal sexual conduct in New York. And that's what I was trying to capture in the instruction, so that that evidence could be relevant, the jury could see that evidence as relevant to the enticement to illegal sexual activity as defined under New York law, which is the only way that the government has charged this case, other than the trafficking count -- well, including the trafficking count, yes.\n\nAnd that's what I was trying to capture. And I'll consider the alterations you're suggesting. What we can't do is infuse the instruction with the government's case and arguments. The point here is just to make clear what the jurors can do and then, to the extent they otherwise deem the evidence relevant, they can consider it and we'll give them the charge at the end of the day. But I'll consider the suggestions. I haven't -- just haven't had time.\n\nAnything on that?",
  20. "position": "main content"
  21. },
  22. {
  23. "type": "printed",
  24. "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  25. "position": "footer"
  26. },
  27. {
  28. "type": "printed",
  29. "content": "DOJ-OGR-00011652",
  30. "position": "footer"
  31. }
  32. ],
  33. "entities": {
  34. "people": [],
  35. "organizations": [
  36. "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
  37. ],
  38. "locations": [
  39. "New Mexico",
  40. "New York"
  41. ],
  42. "dates": [
  43. "08/10/22"
  44. ],
  45. "reference_numbers": [
  46. "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
  47. "739",
  48. "DOJ-OGR-00011652"
  49. ]
  50. },
  51. "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with no visible redactions or damage."
  52. }