DOJ-OGR-00013220.json 4.0 KB

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253
  1. {
  2. "document_metadata": {
  3. "page_number": "207",
  4. "document_number": "753",
  5. "date": "08/10/22",
  6. "document_type": "court transcript",
  7. "has_handwriting": false,
  8. "has_stamps": false
  9. },
  10. "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 753 Filed 08/10/22 Page 207 of 264 1648 LC7VMAX7 Carolyn - cross respond to that for paragraph 39? MS. COMEY: So for 39, your Honor, first with respect to the time frame, I think the first clause is for the second time in that month of that year. That's not inconsistent with what the witness testified to. She testified she was going frequently, certainly at least twice a month, through 2002. So that's not inconsistent. With respect to the sex acts, I think here is part of the issue with taking a legal document and trying to suggest that the witness should have included every single detail in it. It is not necessarily the case that in order to make out the legal claims in this complaint, that a lawyer would have needed to include anything other than fondling and masturbation. So it is not to be expected that if she had told her attorneys about the other sex acts, that they would have included it. And so I don't think the theory of omissions works with respect to the sex acts. MR. PAGLIUCA: I disagree, your Honor. THE COURT: Yes, I imagine. MR. PAGLIUCA: I mean, Ms. Comey doesn't do civil work, but it is significant. And it is significant for many reasons. And in particular -- THE COURT: This one, there are details included. The one detail that was testified to is a significant detail. So with respect to 39, I'll overrule. Sorry, I'll sustain. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00013220",
  11. "text_blocks": [
  12. {
  13. "type": "printed",
  14. "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 753 Filed 08/10/22 Page 207 of 264 1648 LC7VMAX7 Carolyn - cross",
  15. "position": "header"
  16. },
  17. {
  18. "type": "printed",
  19. "content": "respond to that for paragraph 39? MS. COMEY: So for 39, your Honor, first with respect to the time frame, I think the first clause is for the second time in that month of that year. That's not inconsistent with what the witness testified to. She testified she was going frequently, certainly at least twice a month, through 2002. So that's not inconsistent. With respect to the sex acts, I think here is part of the issue with taking a legal document and trying to suggest that the witness should have included every single detail in it. It is not necessarily the case that in order to make out the legal claims in this complaint, that a lawyer would have needed to include anything other than fondling and masturbation. So it is not to be expected that if she had told her attorneys about the other sex acts, that they would have included it. And so I don't think the theory of omissions works with respect to the sex acts. MR. PAGLIUCA: I disagree, your Honor. THE COURT: Yes, I imagine. MR. PAGLIUCA: I mean, Ms. Comey doesn't do civil work, but it is significant. And it is significant for many reasons. And in particular -- THE COURT: This one, there are details included. The one detail that was testified to is a significant detail. So with respect to 39, I'll overrule. Sorry, I'll sustain.",
  20. "position": "main"
  21. },
  22. {
  23. "type": "printed",
  24. "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  25. "position": "footer"
  26. },
  27. {
  28. "type": "printed",
  29. "content": "DOJ-OGR-00013220",
  30. "position": "footer"
  31. }
  32. ],
  33. "entities": {
  34. "people": [
  35. "MS. COMEY",
  36. "MR. PAGLIUCA"
  37. ],
  38. "organizations": [
  39. "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
  40. ],
  41. "locations": [],
  42. "dates": [
  43. "08/10/22",
  44. "2002"
  45. ],
  46. "reference_numbers": [
  47. "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
  48. "753",
  49. "DOJ-OGR-00013220"
  50. ]
  51. },
  52. "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a discussion between lawyers and the court regarding a legal case. The text is mostly typed, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The footer contains the name and contact information of the reporting agency and a reference number."
  53. }