mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00009488.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "68",
    "document_number": "16166201",
    "date": "02/24/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 16166201 Filed 02/24/22 Page 68 of 117\nA-5912\n10\nCAC3PARC\n1 going to win. We're going to have a sentencing in January and\n2 not a trial in the spring. But I don't think you can read that\n3 much into it, and I don't think that in fairness to Mr. Parse\n4 the record supports that. But I understand your Honor's views\n5 of the matter. I can't say more.\n6 THE COURT: Other than the alleged deficiencies by the\n7 Brune firm regarding Juror No. 1, was Parse's counsel otherwise\n8 constitutionally effective?\n9 MR. SHECHTMAN: Look, I've never read a trial record\n10 where I didn't wish I wish they would have preserved that issue,\n11 I wish they would have made that argument, I think that\n12 cross-examination could have been stronger. I came away from\n13 that trial thinking, boy, that Barry Berke is a great\n14 cross-examiner.\n15 If you asked me was it constitutionally adequate, you\n16 bet. It was very solid defense by a group of very good\n17 lawyers. So, that's one easy for me.\n18 THE COURT: Can you think of any circumstance where a\n19 Court could find both a waiver to an impartial jury and\n20 effective assistance of counsel?\n21 MR. SHECHTMAN: Yes. I think. The simplest one is if\n22 it really was a strategic decision, take the most blatant case,\n23 the lawyer said to themselves free bite at the apple, don't\n24 tell the judge. If we get an acquittal the great thing about\n25 the double jeopardy clause is it's over. That is a waiver\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00009488",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 16166201 Filed 02/24/22 Page 68 of 117",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A-5912",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "10\nCAC3PARC\n1 going to win. We're going to have a sentencing in January and\n2 not a trial in the spring. But I don't think you can read that\n3 much into it, and I don't think that in fairness to Mr. Parse\n4 the record supports that. But I understand your Honor's views\n5 of the matter. I can't say more.\n6 THE COURT: Other than the alleged deficiencies by the\n7 Brune firm regarding Juror No. 1, was Parse's counsel otherwise\n8 constitutionally effective?\n9 MR. SHECHTMAN: Look, I've never read a trial record\n10 where I didn't wish I wish they would have preserved that issue,\n11 I wish they would have made that argument, I think that\n12 cross-examination could have been stronger. I came away from\n13 that trial thinking, boy, that Barry Berke is a great\n14 cross-examiner.\n15 If you asked me was it constitutionally adequate, you\n16 bet. It was very solid defense by a group of very good\n17 lawyers. So, that's one easy for me.\n18 THE COURT: Can you think of any circumstance where a\n19 Court could find both a waiver to an impartial jury and\n20 effective assistance of counsel?\n21 MR. SHECHTMAN: Yes. I think. The simplest one is if\n22 it really was a strategic decision, take the most blatant case,\n23 the lawyer said to themselves free bite at the apple, don't\n24 tell the judge. If we get an acquittal the great thing about\n25 the double jeopardy clause is it's over. That is a waiver",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009488",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Mr. Parse",
      "Barry Berke",
      "MR. SHECHTMAN"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Brune firm",
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "January",
      "02/24/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00338-PAE",
      "16166201",
      "A-5912",
      "DOJ-OGR-00009488"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible text. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}