mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014190.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "84",
    "document_number": "763",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 84 of 197 2625\nLCHCmax3 Young - cross\n1 (At the sidebar)\n2 MS. COMEY: Your Honor, I'm transitioning entirely away from where we were at the prior sidebar. I was about to switch to eliciting some prior consistent statements of Jane's.\n3 I do believe the door has been opened for that, but I understand defense counsel would object as beyond the scope.\n4 But for efficiency purposes, I was going to ask her now while she's on the stand about these prior consistent statements.\n5 MS. MENNINGER: I mean, your Honor, opening the door to prior consistent statements in this manner will then, on recross, I think open the door to any number of other prior inconsistent statements that your Honor just ruled out, and we had to go through an entire process to get in the very few prior inconsistent statements we did. The government hasn't even told us now which prior consistent statement that they're offering.\n6 THE COURT: Rebuttal if it's beyond the scope. So sustained with the opportunity to confer if they want to recall the witness for rebuttal.\n7 (Continued on next page)\n8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n9 DOJ-OGR-00014190",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 84 of 197 2625",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LCHCmax3 Young - cross",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "(At the sidebar)\nMS. COMEY: Your Honor, I'm transitioning entirely away from where we were at the prior sidebar. I was about to switch to eliciting some prior consistent statements of Jane's.\nI do believe the door has been opened for that, but I understand defense counsel would object as beyond the scope.\nBut for efficiency purposes, I was going to ask her now while she's on the stand about these prior consistent statements.\nMS. MENNINGER: I mean, your Honor, opening the door to prior consistent statements in this manner will then, on recross, I think open the door to any number of other prior inconsistent statements that your Honor just ruled out, and we had to go through an entire process to get in the very few prior inconsistent statements we did. The government hasn't even told us now which prior consistent statement that they're offering.\nTHE COURT: Rebuttal if it's beyond the scope. So sustained with the opportunity to confer if they want to recall the witness for rebuttal.\n(Continued on next page)",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014190",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MS. COMEY",
      "MS. MENNINGER",
      "Jane"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "763",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014190"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a discussion between lawyers and the judge about the admissibility of certain statements. The text is mostly clear, but there may be some minor formatting issues due to the original document's layout."
}