mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00011674.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "9",
    "document_number": "741",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 741 Filed 08/10/22 Page 9 of 106\nLBTVMAX1\n\n1 MS. MOE: Thank you, your Honor.\n2 The second issue is with respect to the issue of\n3 having a screen that the witness sees, but which the government\n4 can't see, I think the Court noted there is an issue with the\n5 government not being able to follow what the witness is being\n6 shown.\n7 Our concern in particular is that in a letter defense\n8 counsel filed, I think they previewed that they plan to sort of\n9 highlight some portions of the documents or flag certain\n10 portions on the screen. That is very difficult for us to\n11 follow without a mirrored screen. And so because we cannot\n12 mirror the screens because they are open to the gallery, that\n13 is why we proposed using paper for exhibits like that, and so\n14 we ask to proceed that way.\n15 THE COURT: Here's my thinking: Let's say they show\n16 the paper and then they say, Okay, paragraph 2, read the first\n17 sentence. If they want to highlight or make larger that first\n18 sentence to ease the reading of it for the witness, if they've\n19 described fully what they're doing on the screen, and I'm\n20 watching it, I think that's okay and it is not that different\n21 than doing it orally and with paper. And I would, of course,\n22 allow the same for the government, to the extent that there are\n23 documents that you may have a witness look at that can't -- if\n24 they can't be projected on the counsel table because it might\n25 be identifying, I would permit that as well.\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 741 Filed 08/10/22 Page 9 of 106",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LBTVMAX1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 MS. MOE: Thank you, your Honor.\n2 The second issue is with respect to the issue of\n3 having a screen that the witness sees, but which the government\n4 can't see, I think the Court noted there is an issue with the\n5 government not being able to follow what the witness is being\n6 shown.\n7 Our concern in particular is that in a letter defense\n8 counsel filed, I think they previewed that they plan to sort of\n9 highlight some portions of the documents or flag certain\n10 portions on the screen. That is very difficult for us to\n11 follow without a mirrored screen. And so because we cannot\n12 mirror the screens because they are open to the gallery, that\n13 is why we proposed using paper for exhibits like that, and so\n14 we ask to proceed that way.\n15 THE COURT: Here's my thinking: Let's say they show\n16 the paper and then they say, Okay, paragraph 2, read the first\n17 sentence. If they want to highlight or make larger that first\n18 sentence to ease the reading of it for the witness, if they've\n19 described fully what they're doing on the screen, and I'm\n20 watching it, I think that's okay and it is not that different\n21 than doing it orally and with paper. And I would, of course,\n22 allow the same for the government, to the extent that there are\n23 documents that you may have a witness look at that can't -- if\n24 they can't be projected on the counsel table because it might\n25 be identifying, I would permit that as well.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MS. MOE"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "741"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and readable format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}