DOJ-OGR-00014048.json 3.2 KB

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859606162
  1. {
  2. "document_metadata": {
  3. "page_number": "189",
  4. "document_number": "761",
  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 761 Filed 08/10/22 Page 189 of 246\nLCGVMAX5 Loftus - redirect 2484\n1 MS. POMERANTZ: Objection.\n2 A. Yes, I do.\n3 THE COURT: I'm going to sustain.\n4 Q. They took issue with the fact that you have testified in criminal cases predominantly for the defense?\n5\n6 MS. POMERANTZ: Objection.\n7 THE COURT: Grounds.\n8 MS. POMERANTZ: Mischaracterization, your Honor.\n9 THE COURT: Overruled.\n10 Q. You have worked as a consultant for the federal government, have you not?\n11\n12 A. Yes.\n13 Q. For the Secret Service; correct?\n14 A. Yes.\n15 Q. For the Department of Justice; correct?\n16 A. Yes.\n17 Q. For the FBI; correct?\n18 A. Yes.\n19 Q. For the Internal Revenue Service; correct?\n20 A. Yes.\n21 Q. And those entities were aware that you have provided testimony for defendants in criminal matters; correct?\n22\n23 MS. POMERANTZ: Objection.\n24 THE COURT: Grounds.\n25 MS. POMERANTZ: Foundation.\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00014048",
  11. "text_blocks": [
  12. {
  13. "type": "printed",
  14. "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 761 Filed 08/10/22 Page 189 of 246",
  15. "position": "header"
  16. },
  17. {
  18. "type": "printed",
  19. "content": "LCGVMAX5 Loftus - redirect 2484",
  20. "position": "header"
  21. },
  22. {
  23. "type": "printed",
  24. "content": "1 MS. POMERANTZ: Objection.\n2 A. Yes, I do.\n3 THE COURT: I'm going to sustain.\n4 Q. They took issue with the fact that you have testified in criminal cases predominantly for the defense?\n5\n6 MS. POMERANTZ: Objection.\n7 THE COURT: Grounds.\n8 MS. POMERANTZ: Mischaracterization, your Honor.\n9 THE COURT: Overruled.\n10 Q. You have worked as a consultant for the federal government, have you not?\n11\n12 A. Yes.\n13 Q. For the Secret Service; correct?\n14 A. Yes.\n15 Q. For the Department of Justice; correct?\n16 A. Yes.\n17 Q. For the FBI; correct?\n18 A. Yes.\n19 Q. For the Internal Revenue Service; correct?\n20 A. Yes.\n21 Q. And those entities were aware that you have provided testimony for defendants in criminal matters; correct?\n22\n23 MS. POMERANTZ: Objection.\n24 THE COURT: Grounds.\n25 MS. POMERANTZ: Foundation.",
  25. "position": "main"
  26. },
  27. {
  28. "type": "printed",
  29. "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  30. "position": "footer"
  31. },
  32. {
  33. "type": "printed",
  34. "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014048",
  35. "position": "footer"
  36. }
  37. ],
  38. "entities": {
  39. "people": [],
  40. "organizations": [
  41. "Secret Service",
  42. "Department of Justice",
  43. "FBI",
  44. "Internal Revenue Service",
  45. "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
  46. ],
  47. "locations": [],
  48. "dates": [
  49. "08/10/22"
  50. ],
  51. "reference_numbers": [
  52. "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
  53. "761",
  54. "189",
  55. "246",
  56. "2484",
  57. "DOJ-OGR-00014048",
  58. "(212) 805-0300"
  59. ]
  60. },
  61. "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
  62. }