mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00010032.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "292",
    "document_number": "A-5749",
    "date": null,
    "document_type": "transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "C2grdau2 Brune - direct 292\n1 A. That's right.\n2 Q. It was filed under your signature?\n3 A. It was.\n4 Q. With your ECF number?\n5 A. That's so.\n6 Q. You were ultimately responsible for the factual assertions\n7 in that brief, correct?\n8 A. I reviewed it and I signed it and I am responsible\n9 for it.\n10 Q. That set of facts was not accurate and complete, was it,\n11 Ms. Brune?\n12 A. When I reflect on that brief, and I certainly have done so\n13 repeatedly and at length, it's the thing that I regret. What I\n14 mean by that is we kind of missed it. There were two things\n15 that were going on. One is we were spending a lot of energy\n16 trying to persuade ourselves that what we were going to say to\n17 the judge was right, that is, that there was this fraud that\n18 happened, and we were very focused on not having Mr. Parse's\n19 application kicked out the way that it was kicked out in Martha\n20 Stewart for not sort of having proved it enough.\n21 I certainly thought about the waiver issue. But what\n22 I really missed is I thought that the government would likely\n23 inquire and we would say we didn't know, because we didn't\n24 know. I certainly never imagined that the reality that we did\n25 not know was going to assume the sort of debate level\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C2grdau2 Brune - direct 292",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 A. That's right.\n2 Q. It was filed under your signature?\n3 A. It was.\n4 Q. With your ECF number?\n5 A. That's so.\n6 Q. You were ultimately responsible for the factual assertions\n7 in that brief, correct?\n8 A. I reviewed it and I signed it and I am responsible\n9 for it.\n10 Q. That set of facts was not accurate and complete, was it,\n11 Ms. Brune?\n12 A. When I reflect on that brief, and I certainly have done so\n13 repeatedly and at length, it's the thing that I regret. What I\n14 mean by that is we kind of missed it. There were two things\n15 that were going on. One is we were spending a lot of energy\n16 trying to persuade ourselves that what we were going to say to\n17 the judge was right, that is, that there was this fraud that\n18 happened, and we were very focused on not having Mr. Parse's\n19 application kicked out the way that it was kicked out in Martha\n20 Stewart for not sort of having proved it enough.\n21 I certainly thought about the waiver issue. But what\n22 I really missed is I thought that the government would likely\n23 inquire and we would say we didn't know, because we didn't\n24 know. I certainly never imagined that the reality that we did\n25 not know was going to assume the sort of debate level",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00010032",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Brune",
      "Mr. Parse",
      "Martha Stewart"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "A-5749",
      "DOJ-OGR-00010032"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a transcript of a court proceeding. The text is typed, and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes. The page number is 292, and the document number is A-5749."
}