mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00012768.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "17",
    "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 17 of 261 1157 LC6Cmax1\n\n1 MR. EVERDELL: Yes.\n2 MS. COMEY: That's fine, your Honor. And we thank the defense for their courtesy to Sergeant Dawson.\n3 THE COURT: All right. That all sounds good. What else can I take up?\n4 MR. ROHRBACH: There is one matter from the government, your Honor. Over the weekend, the parties had a productive conversation about topics of cross examination for Kate, the next witness. There is one matter the government wanted to raise with the Court, which is that we expect from our conversations with the defense that the defense is likely to elicit from this witness -- your Honor, may we do this at sidebar?\n5 THE COURT: Yes.\n6 (At the sidebar)\n7 MR. ROHRBACH: So the government understands that the defense is likely to elicit from this witness the name of her counsel and possibly do a courtroom identification of the witness's counsel. The government objects on the grounds that there is no relevance to either of those --\n8 MS. STERNHEIM: Judge, my feeling is when a witness elects to have her counsel in the courtroom for support or for whatever other reason, it is fair game to ask if her counsel is here. That's a choice that the government has elected to make, it is a choice that some attorneys elect. I can say in my 35\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00012768",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 751 Filed 08/10/22 Page 17 of 261 1157 LC6Cmax1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 MR. EVERDELL: Yes.\n2 MS. COMEY: That's fine, your Honor. And we thank the defense for their courtesy to Sergeant Dawson.\n3 THE COURT: All right. That all sounds good. What else can I take up?\n4 MR. ROHRBACH: There is one matter from the government, your Honor. Over the weekend, the parties had a productive conversation about topics of cross examination for Kate, the next witness. There is one matter the government wanted to raise with the Court, which is that we expect from our conversations with the defense that the defense is likely to elicit from this witness -- your Honor, may we do this at sidebar?\n5 THE COURT: Yes.\n6 (At the sidebar)\n7 MR. ROHRBACH: So the government understands that the defense is likely to elicit from this witness the name of her counsel and possibly do a courtroom identification of the witness's counsel. The government objects on the grounds that there is no relevance to either of those --\n8 MS. STERNHEIM: Judge, my feeling is when a witness elects to have her counsel in the courtroom for support or for whatever other reason, it is fair game to ask if her counsel is here. That's a choice that the government has elected to make, it is a choice that some attorneys elect. I can say in my 35",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00012768",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. EVERDELL",
      "MS. COMEY",
      "Sergeant Dawson",
      "MR. ROHRBACH",
      "Kate",
      "MS. STERNHEIM"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "751",
      "DOJ-OGR-00012768"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and readable format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}