mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES008/DOJ-OGR-00021571.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "141",
    "document_number": "78",
    "date": "06/29/2023",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 22-1426, Document 78, 06/29/2023, 3536039, Page141 of 217\nSA-395\nM6SQmax1 26\n1 with the point, which is we're focusing on the record evidence.\n2 The conspiracy as charged requires there be to be a minor involved. Carolyn is not a minor in 2005. Her birthday is\n3 January -- I don't know if I can say that, I'm sorry, but you understand it's at the beginning.\n4\n5 THE COURT: It's early.\n6 MR. EVERDELL: It's early. So as of 2005, she is not a minor any more. So if we're looking to the end date of the\n7 conspiracy that's charged in the indictment, that does not exist in 2005, and Carolyn is not a minor in 2005, that\n8 evidence can't be used to support the end date of the conspiracy that is charged.\n9 So what we're really talking about is one message pad that is undated, unverified, and not even in evidence. It's\n10 not even properly authenticated. I would also point out -- it's not reliable, your Honor. But I would also point out that\n11 I think we did have testimony that there were multiple message pads going on at any one time. The surrounding message pads\n12 are not a perfect indicator of when that message would have been taken if it's undated. It could have been weeks, months\n13 afterwards that someone decided to use that message pad to take that message instead of another of message pad that was ongoing\n14 at the same time. So there is no reliable credible evidence that's the date of that message pad.\n15 And so, your Honor, we cited a number of cases in our\n16 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00021571",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 22-1426, Document 78, 06/29/2023, 3536039, Page141 of 217",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SA-395",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "M6SQmax1 26",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 with the point, which is we're focusing on the record evidence.\n2 The conspiracy as charged requires there be to be a minor involved. Carolyn is not a minor in 2005. Her birthday is\n3 January -- I don't know if I can say that, I'm sorry, but you understand it's at the beginning.\n4\n5 THE COURT: It's early.\n6 MR. EVERDELL: It's early. So as of 2005, she is not a minor any more. So if we're looking to the end date of the\n7 conspiracy that's charged in the indictment, that does not exist in 2005, and Carolyn is not a minor in 2005, that\n8 evidence can't be used to support the end date of the conspiracy that is charged.\n9 So what we're really talking about is one message pad that is undated, unverified, and not even in evidence. It's\n10 not even properly authenticated. I would also point out -- it's not reliable, your Honor. But I would also point out that\n11 I think we did have testimony that there were multiple message pads going on at any one time. The surrounding message pads\n12 are not a perfect indicator of when that message would have been taken if it's undated. It could have been weeks, months\n13 afterwards that someone decided to use that message pad to take that message instead of another of message pad that was ongoing\n14 at the same time. So there is no reliable credible evidence that's the date of that message pad.\n15 And so, your Honor, we cited a number of cases in our",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00021571",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Carolyn",
      "MR. EVERDELL"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "January",
      "2005",
      "06/29/2023"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "22-1426",
      "78",
      "3536039",
      "DOJ-OGR-00021571"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}