mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES006/DOJ-OGR-00016984.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "58",
    "document_number": "765",
    "date": "08/10/2022",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page 58 of 95 2796\n\n1 THE COURT: So I think that's the request. So line 18\n2 on my page 50, which is the second page of Instruction No. 36,\n3 we will cut comma, \"including at times Maxwell,\" comma.\n4 MR. ROHRBACH: And in light of that change, your\n5 Honor, on line 11 of that page, it should say, \"The indictment\n6 alleges as follows.\"\n7 THE COURT: Right. On line 11, changing \"reads\" to\n8 \"alleges.\"\n9 What's next, Mr. Everdell?\n10 MR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor. It's on page 51,\n11 line 15. I think we've been using \"Ms. Maxwell\" in this\n12 charge, so we'll change on line 15 \"the defendant\" to\n13 \"Ms. Maxwell.\"\n14 MR. ROHRBACH: That's fine, your Honor.\n15 THE COURT: Okay. So we're on Instruction No. 36.\n16 Close to the end of that, the second to last paragraph of that\n17 instruction, line 15, changing \"the defendant\" to\n18 \"Ms. Maxwell.\"\n19 So one question. We've taken Kate out of the overt\n20 acts. Page 51, lines 13 through 16 are no longer seem to make\n21 sense.\n22 MR. EVERDELL: 51, your Honor?\n23 THE COURT: Yeah. Right?\n24 MR. EVERDELL: Well, I understand what you're saying\n25 with respect to reference to overt acts because she's not in\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\n\nDOJ-OGR-00016984",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page 58 of 95 2796",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: So I think that's the request. So line 18 on my page 50, which is the second page of Instruction No. 36, we will cut comma, \"including at times Maxwell,\" comma. MR. ROHRBACH: And in light of that change, your Honor, on line 11 of that page, it should say, \"The indictment alleges as follows.\" THE COURT: Right. On line 11, changing \"reads\" to \"alleges.\" What's next, Mr. Everdell? MR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor. It's on page 51, line 15. I think we've been using \"Ms. Maxwell\" in this charge, so we'll change on line 15 \"the defendant\" to \"Ms. Maxwell.\" MR. ROHRBACH: That's fine, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. So we're on Instruction No. 36. Close to the end of that, the second to last paragraph of that instruction, line 15, changing \"the defendant\" to \"Ms. Maxwell.\" So one question. We've taken Kate out of the overt acts. Page 51, lines 13 through 16 are no longer seem to make sense. MR. EVERDELL: 51, your Honor? THE COURT: Yeah. Right? MR. EVERDELL: Well, I understand what you're saying with respect to reference to overt acts because she's not in",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00016984",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Mr. Everdell",
      "Mr. Rohrbach",
      "Maxwell",
      "Kate"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/2022"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "765",
      "DOJ-OGR-00016984"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}