mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014002.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "143",
    "document_number": "761",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 761 Filed 08/10/22 Page 143 of 246 2438 LGCmax4 Loftus - direct\n1 MS. COMEY: Your Honor, we believe that's collateral, and extrinsic evidence isn't appropriate on a collateral matter.\n2 THE COURT: And also, the quote was read in court, wasn't it?\n3 MS. COMEY: Yes, your honor.\n4 THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection to that one.\n5 MR. PAGLIUCA: The next is 1567, lines 7 through 19.\n6 THE COURT: Okay. Just give me one moment.\n7 MR. PAGLIUCA: Sure.\n8 THE COURT: Okay.\n9 MR. PAGLIUCA: And the prior inconsistent statement is at 3505, 005, page 1, second paragraph. Virginia explained Carolyn could make $300 by providing a man in Palm Beach with a massage.\n10 MS. COMEY: Your Honor, our view is that the relevant portion was read into the record and then, at lines 23 of 1567 through 2 of 1568, she was asked specifically whether she made that statement to the FBI and she responded, yes, she told me that. So I don't see how extrinsic evidence would be appropriate.\n11 MR. PAGLIUCA: I think it's inconsistent, your Honor.\n12 There is a denial and then there is a yes, she told me that, and I think with that inconsistency, we should be allowed to impeach it.\n13 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n14 DOJ-OGR-00014002",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 761 Filed 08/10/22 Page 143 of 246 2438 LGCmax4 Loftus - direct",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 MS. COMEY: Your Honor, we believe that's collateral, and extrinsic evidence isn't appropriate on a collateral matter.\n2 THE COURT: And also, the quote was read in court, wasn't it?\n3 MS. COMEY: Yes, your honor.\n4 THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection to that one.\n5 MR. PAGLIUCA: The next is 1567, lines 7 through 19.\n6 THE COURT: Okay. Just give me one moment.\n7 MR. PAGLIUCA: Sure.\n8 THE COURT: Okay.\n9 MR. PAGLIUCA: And the prior inconsistent statement is at 3505, 005, page 1, second paragraph. Virginia explained Carolyn could make $300 by providing a man in Palm Beach with a massage.\n10 MS. COMEY: Your Honor, our view is that the relevant portion was read into the record and then, at lines 23 of 1567 through 2 of 1568, she was asked specifically whether she made that statement to the FBI and she responded, yes, she told me that. So I don't see how extrinsic evidence would be appropriate.\n11 MR. PAGLIUCA: I think it's inconsistent, your Honor.\n12 There is a denial and then there is a yes, she told me that, and I think with that inconsistency, we should be allowed to impeach it.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014002",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MS. COMEY",
      "THE COURT",
      "MR. PAGLIUCA",
      "Virginia",
      "Carolyn"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "FBI",
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Palm Beach"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "761",
      "1567",
      "1568",
      "3505",
      "005",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014002"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}