mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014361.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "57",
    "document_number": "765",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page 57 of 95 2795\nLC11MAX1\none moment.\nOh, and we'll again change, on line 23, page 49, the word \"reads\" to \"alleges.\"\nMR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: Okay. Next.\nMR. EVERDELL: Same page, page 50, your Honor, line 18, just going back, these are overt acts with respect to Count Five.\nTHE COURT: Mm-hmm.\nMR. EVERDELL: The third one, which begins on line 17, between -- oh, yes. \"Between in or about 2001 and in or about 2004, Epstein's employees, including at times Maxwell, sent Carolyn gifts, including lingerie, etc.\" I don't think there's any evidence in the record that Maxwell sent any gifts. In fact, I think the FedEx records show that it wasn't Maxwell sending anything. I don't think there's any testimony in the record that Maxwell was sending the gifts, so I think that should be excluded.\nMR. ROHRBACH: That's fine, your Honor. This is what the grand jury charged, but that is fine, given the state of the record.\nTHE COURT: Okay.\nMR. ROHRBACH: But to be clear, the government is fine with including the clause -- cutting the clause \"including at times Maxwell.\"\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00014361",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page 57 of 95 2795",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LC11MAX1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "one moment.\nOh, and we'll again change, on line 23, page 49, the word \"reads\" to \"alleges.\"\nMR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: Okay. Next.\nMR. EVERDELL: Same page, page 50, your Honor, line 18, just going back, these are overt acts with respect to Count Five.\nTHE COURT: Mm-hmm.\nMR. EVERDELL: The third one, which begins on line 17, between -- oh, yes. \"Between in or about 2001 and in or about 2004, Epstein's employees, including at times Maxwell, sent Carolyn gifts, including lingerie, etc.\" I don't think there's any evidence in the record that Maxwell sent any gifts. In fact, I think the FedEx records show that it wasn't Maxwell sending anything. I don't think there's any testimony in the record that Maxwell was sending the gifts, so I think that should be excluded.\nMR. ROHRBACH: That's fine, your Honor. This is what the grand jury charged, but that is fine, given the state of the record.\nTHE COURT: Okay.\nMR. ROHRBACH: But to be clear, the government is fine with including the clause -- cutting the clause \"including at times Maxwell.\"",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014361",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. EVERDELL",
      "THE COURT",
      "MR. ROHRBACH",
      "Maxwell",
      "Epstein",
      "Carolyn"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.",
      "FedEx"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22",
      "2001",
      "2004"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "765",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014361"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}