mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014479.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "79",
    "document_number": "767",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 79 of 257 2912 LCKVMAX4\nthe same number on this document. That's certainly permissible and a matter of common sense. We just showed two documents and showed they were the same phone numbers.\nWhat I didn't say is, This is Carolyn's phone number, you know, it's the real phone number. It was a common sense inference between two phone numbers that were the same.\nTHE COURT: I deny the request for mistrial. I overrule the objection. It is consistent with my -- both my conclusion in allowing it with respect to the limited purpose for which the document was entered as indicated in my limiting instruction at the time. And for those reasons, the motion is -- the application is denied.\nAnything else?\nMS. STERNHEIM: No, thank you.\nMS. MOE: Not from the government, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: All right. See you in about 15 -- I want to make sure everybody has enough time for a quick lunch, but my plan is to resume in 20 minutes. Thank you.\n(Luncheon recess)\nMS. MENNINGER: We have technical difficulty, your Honor. The screen is not working.\nHowever, we're working on it.\nTHE COURT: Be seated please.\nHow about a laptop?\n(Pause)\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00014479",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 79 of 257 2912 LCKVMAX4",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "the same number on this document. That's certainly permissible and a matter of common sense. We just showed two documents and showed they were the same phone numbers.\nWhat I didn't say is, This is Carolyn's phone number, you know, it's the real phone number. It was a common sense inference between two phone numbers that were the same.\nTHE COURT: I deny the request for mistrial. I overrule the objection. It is consistent with my -- both my conclusion in allowing it with respect to the limited purpose for which the document was entered as indicated in my limiting instruction at the time. And for those reasons, the motion is -- the application is denied.\nAnything else?\nMS. STERNHEIM: No, thank you.\nMS. MOE: Not from the government, your Honor.\nTHE COURT: All right. See you in about 15 -- I want to make sure everybody has enough time for a quick lunch, but my plan is to resume in 20 minutes. Thank you.\n(Luncheon recess)\nMS. MENNINGER: We have technical difficulty, your Honor. The screen is not working.\nHowever, we're working on it.\nTHE COURT: Be seated please.\nHow about a laptop?\n(Pause)",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014479",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Carolyn",
      "MS. STERNHEIM",
      "MS. MOE",
      "MS. MENNINGER"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "767",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014479",
      "(212) 805-0300"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and readable format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}