mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014357.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "53",
    "document_number": "765",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page 53 of 95 2791 LCI1MAX1\n1 Jane, Jane was -- we would say the indictment alleges that Jane was under the age of 17, in both 1 and 2.\n2\n3 THE COURT: All right. So let me just --\n4 MR. EVERDELL: Yeah.\n5 THE COURT: Hang on. So this is Instruction 36, line 11.\n6\n7 MR. EVERDELL: Correct.\n8 THE COURT: Page 49. I'm going to change \"reads\" to \"alleges,\" and then line 12, we're going to say \"when Jane was under the age of 17,\" correct?\n9\n10 MR. EVERDELL: That's correct.\n11\n12 THE COURT: So that's line 12, subbing 17 for 18.\n13 And then the next instance of that is line 14.\n14\n15 MR. EVERDELL: Correct, your Honor.\n16 THE COURT: \"When Jane was under the age of 17.\"\n17 MR. EVERDELL: Mm-hmm.\n18 THE COURT: And then we get to line 16.\n19\n20 MR. EVERDELL: For this one, I would propose that we simply, you know, eliminate the age, if they want to keep this as an overt act and if we think it's proper for the jury to consider Annie's testimony as a potential overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, even though the goal of the conspiracy is a violation of New York law. So my first objection is that I don't think you can actually consider Annie's testimony as the overt act if what's described there is\n21\n22\n23\n24\n25 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00014357",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page 53 of 95 2791 LCI1MAX1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 Jane, Jane was -- we would say the indictment alleges that Jane was under the age of 17, in both 1 and 2.\n2\n3 THE COURT: All right. So let me just --\n4 MR. EVERDELL: Yeah.\n5 THE COURT: Hang on. So this is Instruction 36, line 11.\n6\n7 MR. EVERDELL: Correct.\n8 THE COURT: Page 49. I'm going to change \"reads\" to \"alleges,\" and then line 12, we're going to say \"when Jane was under the age of 17,\" correct?\n9\n10 MR. EVERDELL: That's correct.\n11\n12 THE COURT: So that's line 12, subbing 17 for 18.\n13 And then the next instance of that is line 14.\n14\n15 MR. EVERDELL: Correct, your Honor.\n16 THE COURT: \"When Jane was under the age of 17.\"\n17 MR. EVERDELL: Mm-hmm.\n18 THE COURT: And then we get to line 16.\n19\n20 MR. EVERDELL: For this one, I would propose that we simply, you know, eliminate the age, if they want to keep this as an overt act and if we think it's proper for the jury to consider Annie's testimony as a potential overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, even though the goal of the conspiracy is a violation of New York law. So my first objection is that I don't think you can actually consider Annie's testimony as the overt act if what's described there is",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014357",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jane",
      "MR. EVERDELL"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "765",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014357"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a discussion between the court and MR. EVERDELL regarding jury instructions and the indictment. The document is well-formatted and legible."
}