mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00010047.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "307",
    "document_number": "A-5764",
    "date": null,
    "document_type": "transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "C2grdau2 Brune - direct 307\ndoctrine protection for the work we had done.\nQ. You knew that those documents would significantly advance\nthe government's position on the waiver issue, correct?\nA. No, because the July 21st letter lays it out, lays it out\naccurately, including the fact that Ms. Trzaskoma had that\ninitial thought that it was one and the same.\nQ. Are you referring to the \"Jesus, I do think that it's her\"\nemail?\nA. Yes.\nQ. You met with Ms. Trzaskoma and Ms. Edelstein prior to this\nhearing, correct?\nA. We worked together. I've certainly talked with her on many\noccasions about the issues that are before the judge in this\nhearing. I'm testifying from my own best recollection, but\nI've certainly talked with them about the issues.\nQ. How many times did you meet with them to discuss this\nhearing?\nA. Never. What I'm saying is I've talked about the issues\nwith them. We worked very hard on the July 21st letter to try\nto get it accurate, but we did not meet in preparation for this\nhearing.\nQ. So, you didn't discuss what your answers would be?\nA. I think that they know what my recollection is, and I think\nI know what their recollection is, because we worked so hard on\nthe letter to reconstruct what had happened.\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C2grdau2 Brune - direct 307",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "doctrine protection for the work we had done.\nQ. You knew that those documents would significantly advance\nthe government's position on the waiver issue, correct?\nA. No, because the July 21st letter lays it out, lays it out\naccurately, including the fact that Ms. Trzaskoma had that\ninitial thought that it was one and the same.\nQ. Are you referring to the \"Jesus, I do think that it's her\"\nemail?\nA. Yes.\nQ. You met with Ms. Trzaskoma and Ms. Edelstein prior to this\nhearing, correct?\nA. We worked together. I've certainly talked with her on many\noccasions about the issues that are before the judge in this\nhearing. I'm testifying from my own best recollection, but\nI've certainly talked with them about the issues.\nQ. How many times did you meet with them to discuss this\nhearing?\nA. Never. What I'm saying is I've talked about the issues\nwith them. We worked very hard on the July 21st letter to try\nto get it accurate, but we did not meet in preparation for this\nhearing.\nQ. So, you didn't discuss what your answers would be?\nA. I think that they know what my recollection is, and I think\nI know what their recollection is, because we worked so hard on\nthe letter to reconstruct what had happened.",
      "position": "main content"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Trzaskoma",
      "Ms. Edelstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "July 21st"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "A-5764",
      "DOJ-OGR-00010047"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a transcript of a hearing or deposition. The text is typed and there are no visible redactions or damage."
}