mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014137.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "31",
    "document_number": "763",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 31 of 197 2572\nLCFCmax1\n\n1    investigation. I just want to make clear that she be called as\n2    a witness who's associated with an adverse party. So I intend\n3    to use leading questions under rule 611(c).\n4\n5    THE COURT: I always encourage you to try -- you begin\n6    with direct and if she becomes adversarial, truth comes out in\n7    direct questions, but if you're not getting response to the\n8    answers or you're getting somewhat responsive answers but it's\n9    delaying, I'll take the application.\n10   Ms. Comey, did you have something?\n11   MS. COMEY: I just wanted to note, your Honor, that my\n12   understanding of Agent Young's testimony is that it's going to\n13   be about the prior inconsistent statements of Jane that your\n14   Honor has ruled are admissible. I don't imagine that much\n15   leading will be necessary for that.\n16   MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, I intend to go into other\n17   aspects with Special Agent Young.\n18   THE COURT: Like what?\n19   MR. EVERDELL: Well, I believe, under your Honor's\n20   ruling, I'm allowed to inquire about the absence of evidence,\n21   and there is an absence of evidence in this case.\n22   THE COURT: Give me an example question.\n23   MR. EVERDELL: Well, there is no emails from the\n24   1990s, there is no geo location. I want to make that clear for\n25   the jury, these are all things that I think jurors in the\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\n\nDOJ-OGR-00014137",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 31 of 197 2572",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LCFCmax1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1    investigation. I just want to make clear that she be called as\na witness who's associated with an adverse party. So I intend\nto use leading questions under rule 611(c).\nTHE COURT: I always encourage you to try -- you begin\nwith direct and if she becomes adversarial, truth comes out in\ndirect questions, but if you're not getting response to the\nanswers or you're getting somewhat responsive answers but it's\ndelaying, I'll take the application.\nMs. Comey, did you have something?\nMS. COMEY: I just wanted to note, your Honor, that my\nunderstanding of Agent Young's testimony is that it's going to\nbe about the prior inconsistent statements of Jane that your\nHonor has ruled are admissible. I don't imagine that much\nleading will be necessary for that.\nMR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, I intend to go into other\naspects with Special Agent Young.\nTHE COURT: Like what?\nMR. EVERDELL: Well, I believe, under your Honor's\nruling, I'm allowed to inquire about the absence of evidence,\nand there is an absence of evidence in this case.\nTHE COURT: Give me an example question.\nMR. EVERDELL: Well, there is no emails from the\n1990s, there is no geo location. I want to make that clear for\nthe jury, these are all things that I think jurors in the",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014137",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Comey",
      "Agent Young",
      "Jane",
      "MR. EVERDELL"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22",
      "1990s"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "763",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014137"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}