mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES001/DOJ-OGR-00000537.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "27",
    "document_number": "36",
    "date": "07/24/19",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 36 Filed 07/24/19 Page 27 of 74\n\n1 to registration which was part of the obligations that he accepted, and no one quarrels with his performance.\n2\n3 He went to the state. They returned the higher charge. He went to jail. He did his strict probation with\n4 home detention. And he's been registered since 2010.\n5\n6 I think these facts are important, not just because they are the cornerstone of a potential legal defense, and I\n7 won't go through all of the different factors that we believe on a principal basis will distinguish this case from the\n8 precedence that Mr. Rossmiller is relying on.\n9\n10 These were not two silos. The Southern District didn't stand completely detached from the activities and the\n11 events in Florida. But that's a motion to dismiss that will be brought later.\n12 The premise is if we're right and they're wrong and he's detained, he's lost freedom without punishment.\n13\n14 Your Honor asked about the rebuttable presumption, and I think this also goes back to the events of the 2007 and 2008\n15 era.\n16\n17 THE COURT: So the presumption, first of all, the people who wrote that presumption into law clearly know about\n18 bail and history and the need for defendants to consult with their counsel, etc.\n19\n20 But in this rather narrow class of cases, almost all of them I think relating to children or young people, there are\n21 a whole series of cases, exceptions to be sure, where the\n22\n23 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n24 (212) 805-0300\n25\nDOJ-OGR-00000537",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 36 Filed 07/24/19 Page 27 of 74",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 to registration which was part of the obligations that he accepted, and no one quarrels with his performance.\nHe went to the state. They returned the higher charge. He went to jail. He did his strict probation with home detention. And he's been registered since 2010.\nI think these facts are important, not just because they are the cornerstone of a potential legal defense, and I won't go through all of the different factors that we believe on a principal basis will distinguish this case from the precedence that Mr. Rossmiller is relying on.\nThese were not two silos. The Southern District didn't stand completely detached from the activities and the events in Florida. But that's a motion to dismiss that will be brought later.\nThe premise is if we're right and they're wrong and he's detained, he's lost freedom without punishment.\nYour Honor asked about the rebuttable presumption, and I think this also goes back to the events of the 2007 and 2008 era.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: So the presumption, first of all, the people who wrote that presumption into law clearly know about bail and history and the need for defendants to consult with their counsel, etc.\nBut in this rather narrow class of cases, almost all of them I think relating to children or young people, there are a whole series of cases, exceptions to be sure, where the",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00000537",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Mr. Rossmiller"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Florida",
      "Southern District"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "2010",
      "2007",
      "2008",
      "07/24/19"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:19-cr-00490-RMB",
      "Document 36",
      "DOJ-OGR-00000537"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}