mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00012539.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "25",
    "document_number": "749",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 749 Filed 08/10/22 Page 25 of 236 LBUCmax1\n\toccur at this trial.\n\nSo our view is that it should be admitted now,\nregardless of future witness testimony based on the record to date and the arguments from the defense about what was going on, the age of the victims, and whether anyone was interested in underage girls.\n\nSo we would ask the Court to admit this evidence now, but if the Court's ruling is dependent upon the prospective testimony of a witness, we would have no objection to offering it subject to connection or the Court reserving on that issue.\n\nTHE COURT: So for the reasons that I permitted testimony similar, I concluded it was relevant and not outweighed by prejudice. That's my point, is consistency. I think for the timeframe issue, I'll reserve subject to connection.\n\nMS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. Just so I understand how to navigate that issue with this witness, would the Court's preference be -- I'm just thinking about the mechanics of this in terms of what's coming out before the jury to lay the foundation for this before the Court reserves, being mindful that the Court is reserving on this issue.\n\nTHE COURT: This is coming in through photographs, I presume?\n\nMS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. There are photographs of those costumes. Because they are folded, we are also offering\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 749 Filed 08/10/22 Page 25 of 236 LBUCmax1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "occur at this trial.\n\nSo our view is that it should be admitted now,\nregardless of future witness testimony based on the record to date and the arguments from the defense about what was going on, the age of the victims, and whether anyone was interested in underage girls.\n\nSo we would ask the Court to admit this evidence now, but if the Court's ruling is dependent upon the prospective testimony of a witness, we would have no objection to offering it subject to connection or the Court reserving on that issue.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: So for the reasons that I permitted testimony similar, I concluded it was relevant and not outweighed by prejudice. That's my point, is consistency. I think for the timeframe issue, I'll reserve subject to connection.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. Just so I understand how to navigate that issue with this witness, would the Court's preference be -- I'm just thinking about the mechanics of this in terms of what's coming out before the jury to lay the foundation for this before the Court reserves, being mindful that the Court is reserving on this issue.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "THE COURT: This is coming in through photographs, I presume?",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. There are photographs of those costumes. Because they are folded, we are also offering",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MS. MOE"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "749"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}