mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES008/DOJ-OGR-00022011.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "8",
    "document_number": "26",
    "date": "02/10/20",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT Document 26 Filed 02/10/20 Page 8 of 15\n\nstatements and interview additional -- interview those witnesses, that can't possibly weigh in favor of an adjournment when in fact the defense counsel has so much more time with those materials than they would in a typical trial schedule where they might have those materials just a few weeks before trial, your Honor.\n\nSo for those reasons, we think that we are hard pressed to identify areas of additional investigation that would touch on the 14-hour time period that is going to be at issue in this trial; and so, for those reasons, while we agree that a short adjournment is warranted, that six months is not required. We do understand of course that that may be difficult with Mr. Foy's trial schedule with having the July trial, but it seems like there may be a possibility of putting this trial before Mr. Foy's July trial and still giving him sufficient time to prepare for both.\n\nTHE COURT: And how long do you expect this trial to go?\n\nMS. LONERGAN: Your Honor, if this trial is confined to that 14-hour time period, setting aside jury selection, I can't imagine it lasting more than a week.\n\nTHE COURT: Okay. The trial is set for June 8.\n\nWith respect to the motion to dismiss, the motion is due on March 9, opposition is due by April 6, and the reply is due on April 20.\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT Document 26 Filed 02/10/20 Page 8 of 15",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "statements and interview additional -- interview those witnesses, that can't possibly weigh in favor of an adjournment when in fact the defense counsel has so much more time with those materials than they would in a typical trial schedule where they might have those materials just a few weeks before trial, your Honor.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "So for those reasons, we think that we are hard pressed to identify areas of additional investigation that would touch on the 14-hour time period that is going to be at issue in this trial; and so, for those reasons, while we agree that a short adjournment is warranted, that six months is not required. We do understand of course that that may be difficult with Mr. Foy's trial schedule with having the July trial, but it seems like there may be a possibility of putting this trial before Mr. Foy's July trial and still giving him sufficient time to prepare for both.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: And how long do you expect this trial to go?",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "MS. LONERGAN: Your Honor, if this trial is confined to that 14-hour time period, setting aside jury selection, I can't imagine it lasting more than a week.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: Okay. The trial is set for June 8.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "With respect to the motion to dismiss, the motion is due on March 9, opposition is due by April 6, and the reply is due on April 20.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Mr. Foy",
      "MS. LONERGAN"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "March 9",
      "April 6",
      "April 20",
      "June 8",
      "July"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:19-cr-00830-AT",
      "Document 26"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}