mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00012362.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "77",
    "document_number": "747",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 747 Filed 08/10/22 Page 77 of 228 753 LC2VMAX2 Rocchio - Direct expert testimony through your cross-examination. MR. PAGLIUCA: I do not intend to do that, your Honor. I would say that absent a few other questions, much of my cross-examination -- and not, frankly, on the topic of the literature that was discussed during the Daubert hearing, but much of my cross-examination is similar to that which was -- that occurred that your Honor pointed out during the hearing was -- may be appropriate in front of a jury. That was a comment that the Court made. THE COURT: I did say that. MR. PAGLIUCA: That was not helpful to you during the Daubert hearing, but it might be helpful in front of a jury. So that is some of the cross-examination. THE COURT: I think I particularly said that when you were spending a fair amount of time on hourly fees. MR. PAGLIUCA: I understand, your Honor. THE COURT: Has very little effect on me. MR. PAGLIUCA: I understand. THE COURT: I understand the concern, at least with respect to suggestive memory. We've established there's some fair grounds to cross to make sure she's considered other bases. That's kind of classic cross of an expert. I won't allow insertion of undisclosed expert testimony via cross-examination questions, and you won't do that. And you'll object, Ms. Pomerantz, if so. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00012362",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 747 Filed 08/10/22 Page 77 of 228 753 LC2VMAX2 Rocchio - Direct",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "expert testimony through your cross-examination. MR. PAGLIUCA: I do not intend to do that, your Honor. I would say that absent a few other questions, much of my cross-examination -- and not, frankly, on the topic of the literature that was discussed during the Daubert hearing, but much of my cross-examination is similar to that which was -- that occurred that your Honor pointed out during the hearing was -- may be appropriate in front of a jury. That was a comment that the Court made. THE COURT: I did say that. MR. PAGLIUCA: That was not helpful to you during the Daubert hearing, but it might be helpful in front of a jury. So that is some of the cross-examination. THE COURT: I think I particularly said that when you were spending a fair amount of time on hourly fees. MR. PAGLIUCA: I understand, your Honor. THE COURT: Has very little effect on me. MR. PAGLIUCA: I understand. THE COURT: I understand the concern, at least with respect to suggestive memory. We've established there's some fair grounds to cross to make sure she's considered other bases. That's kind of classic cross of an expert. I won't allow insertion of undisclosed expert testimony via cross-examination questions, and you won't do that. And you'll object, Ms. Pomerantz, if so.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00012362",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. PAGLIUCA",
      "Ms. Pomerantz"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 747",
      "DOJ-OGR-00012362"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}