mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES003/DOJ-OGR-00008337.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "27",
    "document_number": "536",
    "date": "12/10/21",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 536 Filed 12/10/21 Page 27 of 43 27 LBNAMAXTps\n\nTHE COURT: So, Ms. Menninger, with respect to Saturday, if there's anything in the notice that's suggested that your expert has different expert opinions on, please provide notice. Otherwise we'll see how it plays out.\n\nMS. MENNINGER: Of course. Thank you, your Honor.\n\nTHE COURT: And then LaPorte and Naso, I don't have any sense, based on the disclosures, what evidence this will go to, and the defense says that's because they don't know what evidence the government will produce. What documents do you imagine you would have these experts analyze?\n\nMR. PAGLIUCA: I think it's unlikely that they will testify, your Honor. The only document that was potentially at issue relates to Accuser No. 2. And I doubt that that -- I doubt that that's going to become an issue during trial. We endorsed them just out of an abundance of caution, and I don't really see it playing out. But I think if it -- if it comes up, if it becomes an issue, certainly I'll give as much notice as I can. But I don't really think they're going to be testifying at trial.\n\nTHE COURT: Good enough for me.\nMr. Rohrbach.\n\nMR. ROHRBACH: I'd like to say it's good enough, your Honor. The concern is that if the defense decides mid trial that they would like to call these experts, it's going to create a difficult situation for the government to file the\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 536 Filed 12/10/21 Page 27 of 43 27 LBNAMAXTps",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: So, Ms. Menninger, with respect to Saturday, if there's anything in the notice that's suggested that your expert has different expert opinions on, please provide notice. Otherwise we'll see how it plays out.\n\nMS. MENNINGER: Of course. Thank you, your Honor.\n\nTHE COURT: And then LaPorte and Naso, I don't have any sense, based on the disclosures, what evidence this will go to, and the defense says that's because they don't know what evidence the government will produce. What documents do you imagine you would have these experts analyze?\n\nMR. PAGLIUCA: I think it's unlikely that they will testify, your Honor. The only document that was potentially at issue relates to Accuser No. 2. And I doubt that that -- I doubt that that's going to become an issue during trial. We endorsed them just out of an abundance of caution, and I don't really see it playing out. But I think if it -- if it comes up, if it becomes an issue, certainly I'll give as much notice as I can. But I don't really think they're going to be testifying at trial.\n\nTHE COURT: Good enough for me.\nMr. Rohrbach.\n\nMR. ROHRBACH: I'd like to say it's good enough, your Honor. The concern is that if the defense decides mid trial that they would like to call these experts, it's going to create a difficult situation for the government to file the",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Menninger",
      "LaPorte",
      "Naso",
      "Mr. Pagliuca",
      "Mr. Rohrbach"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "12/10/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "536"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}