| 123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566 |
- {
- "document_metadata": {
- "page_number": "253",
- "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 253 of 261 1414 LC6Cmax7 Meder - direct exists. And I also would like to say with respect to 309, we litigated whether or not we could put in evidence photographs of this witness, and the government called us, I think it was slut shaming when I tried to argue that there were other photographs of this individual that were much like this that she had put out in newspapers, and now they want to put on a photo of her after she's gotten off the stand and not afforded us the opportunity to cross examine her about similar photographs that she has put out. MS. MODE: Your Honor, I'm surprised by all three of those arguments. THE COURT: Let's start with 332. Is the government's representation that the individual depicted in this photo is a minor at the time of the photo? MS. MODE: Your Honor, we made no representations about the metadata of the file of this photo. To be short, in direct, I don't know. There will be testimony at this trial and there has been testimony at this trial that this person was victimized as a minor. In terms of the particular date of this photograph, we're limited by the information we have in the metadata. I believe it's for this reason that the defense had noticed perhaps a metadata expert and the defense will be free to explore that issue. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00013004",
- "text_blocks": [
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 751 Filed 08/10/22 Page 253 of 261 1414 LC6Cmax7 Meder - direct",
- "position": "header"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "exists. And I also would like to say with respect to 309, we litigated whether or not we could put in evidence photographs of this witness, and the government called us, I think it was slut shaming when I tried to argue that there were other photographs of this individual that were much like this that she had put out in newspapers, and now they want to put on a photo of her after she's gotten off the stand and not afforded us the opportunity to cross examine her about similar photographs that she has put out.",
- "position": "main"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "MS. MODE: Your Honor, I'm surprised by all three of those arguments.",
- "position": "main"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "THE COURT: Let's start with 332. Is the government's representation that the individual depicted in this photo is a minor at the time of the photo?",
- "position": "main"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "MS. MODE: Your Honor, we made no representations about the metadata of the file of this photo. To be short, in direct, I don't know. There will be testimony at this trial and there has been testimony at this trial that this person was victimized as a minor. In terms of the particular date of this photograph, we're limited by the information we have in the metadata. I believe it's for this reason that the defense had noticed perhaps a metadata expert and the defense will be free to explore that issue.",
- "position": "main"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
- "position": "footer"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "DOJ-OGR-00013004",
- "position": "footer"
- }
- ],
- "entities": {
- "people": [],
- "organizations": [
- "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
- ],
- "locations": [],
- "dates": [
- "08/10/22"
- ],
- "reference_numbers": [
- "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
- "751",
- "309",
- "332",
- "DOJ-OGR-00013004"
- ]
- },
- "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
- }
|