mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00012754.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "3",
    "document_number": "751",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 751 Filed 08/10/22 Page 3 of 261 1143 LC6Cmax1 to recall details. Defense opposed this request. I have considered the letters by both sides which were filed under seal pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 412. I accept the government's suggestion to include the language in the limiting instruction. The statement is accurate. It ensures a balanced limiting instruction, and it is fair to both sides. It is also appropriate in light of the defense's opening. One question, counsel, the draft language suggests that I direct, quote, the parties to not ask Kate details about the sexual conduct she says occurred with Epstein. I think it would be more accurate to say that I've directed the government not to so ask. I have indicated that if the defense were to do so, it would open the door for the government. So I'll hear from you as to whether your request is to indicate the parties or the government. Mr. Rohrbach. MR. ROHRBACH: That's fine, your Honor. The government just tried to offer a more neutral instruction, but I agree that your -- that that edit is more consistent with the Court's ruling. THE COURT: Mr. Everdell. MR. EVERDELL: I don't think we have an objection if it's the government was directed or however -- THE COURT: Thank you. The instruction, in total, would read -- my next question after this is the parties' SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00012754",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 751 Filed 08/10/22 Page 3 of 261 1143 LC6Cmax1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "to recall details. Defense opposed this request. I have considered the letters by both sides which were filed under seal pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 412. I accept the government's suggestion to include the language in the limiting instruction. The statement is accurate. It ensures a balanced limiting instruction, and it is fair to both sides. It is also appropriate in light of the defense's opening. One question, counsel, the draft language suggests that I direct, quote, the parties to not ask Kate details about the sexual conduct she says occurred with Epstein. I think it would be more accurate to say that I've directed the government not to so ask. I have indicated that if the defense were to do so, it would open the door for the government. So I'll hear from you as to whether your request is to indicate the parties or the government. Mr. Rohrbach. MR. ROHRBACH: That's fine, your Honor. The government just tried to offer a more neutral instruction, but I agree that your -- that that edit is more consistent with the Court's ruling. THE COURT: Mr. Everdell. MR. EVERDELL: I don't think we have an objection if it's the government was directed or however -- THE COURT: Thank you. The instruction, in total, would read -- my next question after this is the parties'",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00012754",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Kate",
      "Epstein",
      "Mr. Rohrbach",
      "Mr. Everdell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "751",
      "DOJ-OGR-00012754"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}