mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014532.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "132",
    "document_number": "767",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 132 of 257 2966 LCKVMAX6 Summation - Ms. Menninger don't tell the truth, they can prosecute you. So it's much easier to just stick with her story here to keep the cash she's already gotten. Carolyn, 17 years later, now claims that Ghislaine Maxwell called her. There's not one phone record showing you that. She claims that Ghislaine sent her things. There's not one FedEx record telling you that. The message pads don't show any contact between Ghislaine and Epstein. She wasn't taking messages for Carolyn, Evelyn was. And they show that Carolyn was calling and her calls were not being returned. There would be evidence if her story were true. Let's talk about Shawn, her boyfriend, with his felony convictions. He says that their visits happened in 2002 and 2003, not 2001 or 2004. He testified in response to questions by the government that Carolyn never talked about Ghislaine. They never talked about Maxwell. Carolyn tried to minimize her drug abuse. But Shawn told you that they were abusing -- let me find it, sorry -- were abusing marijuana, cocaine, ecstasy and other pills during that time period. According to Shawn, he and Carolyn shared a phone, and he identified three callers. It would either be Epstein or Sarah Kellen calling; correct? Correct. Yes. He knew it was Sarah, because Sarah told him she was SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00014532",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 132 of 257 2966 LCKVMAX6",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Summation - Ms. Menninger don't tell the truth, they can prosecute you. So it's much easier to just stick with her story here to keep the cash she's already gotten. Carolyn, 17 years later, now claims that Ghislaine Maxwell called her. There's not one phone record showing you that. She claims that Ghislaine sent her things. There's not one FedEx record telling you that. The message pads don't show any contact between Ghislaine and Epstein. She wasn't taking messages for Carolyn, Evelyn was. And they show that Carolyn was calling and her calls were not being returned. There would be evidence if her story were true. Let's talk about Shawn, her boyfriend, with his felony convictions. He says that their visits happened in 2002 and 2003, not 2001 or 2004. He testified in response to questions by the government that Carolyn never talked about Ghislaine. They never talked about Maxwell. Carolyn tried to minimize her drug abuse. But Shawn told you that they were abusing -- let me find it, sorry -- were abusing marijuana, cocaine, ecstasy and other pills during that time period. According to Shawn, he and Carolyn shared a phone, and he identified three callers. It would either be Epstein or Sarah Kellen calling; correct? Correct. Yes. He knew it was Sarah, because Sarah told him she was",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014532",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Carolyn",
      "Ghislaine Maxwell",
      "Epstein",
      "Evelyn",
      "Shawn",
      "Sarah Kellen"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "FedEx",
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22",
      "2001",
      "2002",
      "2003",
      "2004"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "767",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014532"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}