mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014151.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "45",
    "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 45 of 197 2586 LCHVMAX2 information, you got her account, and then you amended the indictment and added her allegations at that point. And those refer to the last two counts in the indictment. MR. ROHRBACH: Your Honor, this is another issue the Court has already ruled on. This is evidence and testimony about the path of the investigation, the government's charging decisions along the way. THE COURT: Could you pull up the mic. MR. ROHRBACH: This is proposed testimony about the government's charging decisions and the path of the investigation along the way, including when the defendant was a target for certain pieces of the investigation and certain counts of the indictment. I think the Court relied on Saldarriaga again and the Duncan opinion when it, in its pretrial rulings, excluded these lines of testimony. And in any event, I understand that Mr. Everdell wants to make this argument to the jury. This is an argument they can make in closing to the jury; but it's not something that they can elicit as evidence from the government's case agent. MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, I don't know how I can make that argument to the jury when there are no facts about when they spoke to these witnesses. THE COURT: To what investigative steps they took. MR. EVERDELL: When they spoke to the witnesses, if SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 45 of 197 2586 LCHVMAX2",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "information, you got her account, and then you amended the indictment and added her allegations at that point. And those refer to the last two counts in the indictment. MR. ROHRBACH: Your Honor, this is another issue the Court has already ruled on. This is evidence and testimony about the path of the investigation, the government's charging decisions along the way. THE COURT: Could you pull up the mic. MR. ROHRBACH: This is proposed testimony about the government's charging decisions and the path of the investigation along the way, including when the defendant was a target for certain pieces of the investigation and certain counts of the indictment. I think the Court relied on Saldarriaga again and the Duncan opinion when it, in its pretrial rulings, excluded these lines of testimony. And in any event, I understand that Mr. Everdell wants to make this argument to the jury. This is an argument they can make in closing to the jury; but it's not something that they can elicit as evidence from the government's case agent. MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, I don't know how I can make that argument to the jury when there are no facts about when they spoke to these witnesses. THE COURT: To what investigative steps they took. MR. EVERDELL: When they spoke to the witnesses, if",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. ROHRBACH",
      "MR. EVERDELL"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "763"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}