mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00011645.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "24 of 43",
    "document_number": "739",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 739 Filed 08/10/22 Page 24 of 43 24 LBNAMAXTps\n\n1    in an abundance of caution, and also identified for the defense\n2    four other cases in which Mr. Flatley has testified on a\n3    similar topic so they can see --\n4\n5    THE COURT: That includes his ex-- to the extent it\n6    crossed over into expert opinion about methodology, for example --\n7\n8    MR. ROHRBACH: If I may have a minute, your Honor.\n9    Mr. Flatley is qualified as an expert in some of those\n10   four cases, which highlights the vagaries of this line, and it\n11   provides information about the bases of his opinion about these topics.\n12\n13   To the extent that there is an issue that is not raised, either in the government's expert notice or 3500, or in the similar exemplars we've given the testimony, that might be something that's outside the bounds of the government axe pert notice, depending on exactly what it is.\n\n17   THE COURT: So I think what we need to do is, you have your expert look at the testimony that he's provided. If he's got some differing expert opinion as to forensic principles or creation of documents or storage and retrieval of digital documents, or what information can be gleaned from metadata generally, I think you should notice those opinions. But absent that, we'll let it play out. OK.\n\n24   MS. MENNINGER: Certainly, your Honor. And obviously if Mr. Flatley attempts to offer opinions during his testimony\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 739 Filed 08/10/22 Page 24 of 43 24 LBNAMAXTps",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "in an abundance of caution, and also identified for the defense four other cases in which Mr. Flatley has testified on a similar topic so they can see --\nTHE COURT: That includes his ex-- to the extent it crossed over into expert opinion about methodology, for example --\nMR. ROHRBACH: If I may have a minute, your Honor. Mr. Flatley is qualified as an expert in some of those four cases, which highlights the vagaries of this line, and it provides information about the bases of his opinion about these topics.\nTo the extent that there is an issue that is not raised, either in the government's expert notice or 3500, or in the similar exemplars we've given the testimony, that might be something that's outside the bounds of the government axe pert notice, depending on exactly what it is.\nTHE COURT: So I think what we need to do is, you have your expert look at the testimony that he's provided. If he's got some differing expert opinion as to forensic principles or creation of documents or storage and retrieval of digital documents, or what information can be gleaned from metadata generally, I think you should notice those opinions. But absent that, we'll let it play out. OK.\nMS. MENNINGER: Certainly, your Honor. And obviously if Mr. Flatley attempts to offer opinions during his testimony",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Mr. Flatley",
      "MR. ROHRBACH",
      "MS. MENNINGER"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "739",
      "3500"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with clear and legible text. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}