mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014269.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "163",
    "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 163 of 197 2704 LCHCmax5\n\nthink both sides argue what they want from it; right?\n\nMR. EVERDELL: I think that's right. All I heard was from the government is that they're now going to object to the other property records, the Stanhope Mews property records, which we were just getting today because we're trying to deal with this issue that came up. We got them from the land registry. I'm happy to show them to the government.\n\nTHE COURT: You say they came up. The whole point of this is you want to impeach the witness's testimony as to which residence it was; right? That's the whole point of this?\n\nMR. EVERDELL: That's correct.\n\nTHE COURT: So let me just ask, if there is a stip as to the two different property ownership records and the depo testimony coming in, is there a need for an additional witness?\n\nIs the defense still seeking an additional witness on Monday that delays trial?\n\nMR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, I think we need to just confer on that one moment.\n\nTHE COURT: Sure.\n\nMR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, yes, because at that point, even though the sides could argue both sides, we feel like we need additional factual development to be able to counter the government's argument that she didn't reside there based on the deposition testimony.\n\nTHE COURT: And when did you get the depo?\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n\nDOJ-OGR-00014269",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 163 of 197 2704 LCHCmax5",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "think both sides argue what they want from it; right?\n\nMR. EVERDELL: I think that's right. All I heard was from the government is that they're now going to object to the other property records, the Stanhope Mews property records, which we were just getting today because we're trying to deal with this issue that came up. We got them from the land registry. I'm happy to show them to the government.\n\nTHE COURT: You say they came up. The whole point of this is you want to impeach the witness's testimony as to which residence it was; right? That's the whole point of this?\n\nMR. EVERDELL: That's correct.\n\nTHE COURT: So let me just ask, if there is a stip as to the two different property ownership records and the depo testimony coming in, is there a need for an additional witness?\n\nIs the defense still seeking an additional witness on Monday that delays trial?\n\nMR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, I think we need to just confer on that one moment.\n\nTHE COURT: Sure.\n\nMR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, yes, because at that point, even though the sides could argue both sides, we feel like we need additional factual development to be able to counter the government's argument that she didn't reside there based on the deposition testimony.\n\nTHE COURT: And when did you get the depo?",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014269",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MR. EVERDELL"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Stanhope Mews"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22",
      "Monday"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "763",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014269"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}