mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00012183.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "163",
    "document_number": "745",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 745 Filed 08/10/22 Page 163 of 264 574 LC1VMAX5 Jane - cross\n\n1 Just to facilitate clarity with respect to the threshold question here about the witness, about her understanding if the question is phrased as her understanding about testifying at trial today and the effect of a civil case, I think the answer to that question has to be no because there is no civil case, there is no pending claim, it's all been resolved.\n\n2 And so I just wanted to clarify whether the question is at the time she started meeting with the government was that her understanding, while the case was active, or whether the question will be about her testimony here at trial.\n\n3 Jane has testified on direct that her understanding is she has no financial stake in the outcome of this case. The civil matter is resolved and the verdict in this case won't affect what she's received from those settlements. And so I just wanted to clarify in terms of how that question is phrased and what we're getting at about the issue about testifying at trial or her initial decision to cooperate with the government.\n\n4 THE COURT: Fair enough.\n\n5 MS. MENNINGER: That's fair.\n\n6 In the paragraph itself it refers to cooperating with the case and it refers to testifying. So I think any reason to believe either one of those --\n\n7 THE COURT: Can you just give us the specific question.\n\n8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n\n9 DOJ-OGR-00012183",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 745 Filed 08/10/22 Page 163 of 264 574",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LC1VMAX5 Jane - cross",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 Just to facilitate clarity with respect to the threshold question here about the witness, about her understanding if the question is phrased as her understanding about testifying at trial today and the effect of a civil case, I think the answer to that question has to be no because there is no civil case, there is no pending claim, it's all been resolved.\n\n2 And so I just wanted to clarify whether the question is at the time she started meeting with the government was that her understanding, while the case was active, or whether the question will be about her testimony here at trial.\n\n3 Jane has testified on direct that her understanding is she has no financial stake in the outcome of this case. The civil matter is resolved and the verdict in this case won't affect what she's received from those settlements. And so I just wanted to clarify in terms of how that question is phrased and what we're getting at about the issue about testifying at trial or her initial decision to cooperate with the government.\n\n4 THE COURT: Fair enough.\n\n5 MS. MENNINGER: That's fair.\n\n6 In the paragraph itself it refers to cooperating with the case and it refers to testifying. So I think any reason to believe either one of those --\n\n7 THE COURT: Can you just give us the specific question.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00012183",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jane",
      "MS. MENNINGER"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "745",
      "DOJ-OGR-00012183"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}