mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES006/DOJ-OGR-00016742.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "13",
    "document_number": "763",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 13 of 197 2554 LCFCmax1\n\nThat's just saying, oh, Judge has a good point, maybe we could strengthen this, I'm going to propose a new witness and delay trial. No.\nMR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, we're not delaying trial. We only had one day of defense case. We're allowed to put on --\nTHE COURT: You're announcing a new witness simply because I've questioned the relevance of the ownership documents by asking if they showed ownership or residency, because I thought, well, if it's just ownership, maybe it's not relevant, but I'm letting them in. If I weren't letting them in, I suppose you'd have a point.\nMR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, the way the stipulation I understand is going to be worded with the government allowing admitting the testimony from Ms. Maxwell's testimony, they will be arguing to the jury that that shows that she didn't reside there, that the ownership records don't show residency, and you can infer from that that maybe she was there at the time period.\nTHE COURT: Is that deposition transcript new information to you? You weren't aware that your client --\nMS. MENNINGER: It was a property deposition that was taken in 2019, a slip and fall, and she was deposed as a third-party witness. They didn't give it to us. We still don't have the entire deposition. So yes, your Honor, it is\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00016742",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 13 of 197 2554 LCFCmax1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00016742",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "That's just saying, oh, Judge has a good point, maybe we could strengthen this, I'm going to propose a new witness and delay trial. No.\nMR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, we're not delaying trial. We only had one day of defense case. We're allowed to put on --\nTHE COURT: You're announcing a new witness simply because I've questioned the relevance of the ownership documents by asking if they showed ownership or residency, because I thought, well, if it's just ownership, maybe it's not relevant, but I'm letting them in. If I weren't letting them in, I suppose you'd have a point.\nMR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, the way the stipulation I understand is going to be worded with the government allowing admitting the testimony from Ms. Maxwell's testimony, they will be arguing to the jury that that shows that she didn't reside there, that the ownership records don't show residency, and you can infer from that that maybe she was there at the time period.\nTHE COURT: Is that deposition transcript new information to you? You weren't aware that your client --\nMS. MENNINGER: It was a property deposition that was taken in 2019, a slip and fall, and she was deposed as a third-party witness. They didn't give it to us. We still don't have the entire deposition. So yes, your Honor, it is",
      "position": "main content"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Judge",
      "MR. EVERDELL",
      "MS. MENNINGER",
      "Ms. Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.",
      "DOJ"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22",
      "2019"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "Document 763",
      "DOJ-OGR-00016742"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}