mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014573.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "173",
    "document_number": "767",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "Rebuttal - Ms. Comey",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 173 of 257 3007 LCKCmax7 Rebuttal - Ms. Comey Maxwell? What do you think stands out in her memory more, who the pregnant person in that picture was or the middle-aged man who was masturbating and touching her breasts inside that room? That is the definition of a peripheral detail. And why is the defense focusing so much on these peripheral details? Because they desperately want you to ignore the fact that Carolyn has consistently remembered Maxwell as one of the people involved in her experiences at that house. They want you to forget that she mentioned Maxwell not once, but twice in her 2009 deposition. Without prompting, Carolyn named Maxwell as one of the two people who would call her to schedule these massages with Jeffrey Epstein. She named her as one of the two people she would talk to when she called herself begging to come over because she needed the money. And Carolyn told Sean that she met a woman named Maxwell, whose first name she couldn't pronounce. Now, back then there was no reason for Carolyn to go into more detail about what was happening with Maxwell, especially not in a lawsuit that was about Sarah and Epstein. But when she was asked more detailed questions, she remembered the core events, and she'd already mentioned Maxwell, without prompting, long before there could be anything to contaminate her memory. Next, the defense suggests that somehow these clear memories of Maxwell got implanted into the brains of Jane and SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00014573",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 173 of 257 3007 LCKCmax7 Rebuttal - Ms. Comey",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Maxwell? What do you think stands out in her memory more, who the pregnant person in that picture was or the middle-aged man who was masturbating and touching her breasts inside that room? That is the definition of a peripheral detail. And why is the defense focusing so much on these peripheral details? Because they desperately want you to ignore the fact that Carolyn has consistently remembered Maxwell as one of the people involved in her experiences at that house. They want you to forget that she mentioned Maxwell not once, but twice in her 2009 deposition. Without prompting, Carolyn named Maxwell as one of the two people who would call her to schedule these massages with Jeffrey Epstein. She named her as one of the two people she would talk to when she called herself begging to come over because she needed the money. And Carolyn told Sean that she met a woman named Maxwell, whose first name she couldn't pronounce. Now, back then there was no reason for Carolyn to go into more detail about what was happening with Maxwell, especially not in a lawsuit that was about Sarah and Epstein. But when she was asked more detailed questions, she remembered the core events, and she'd already mentioned Maxwell, without prompting, long before there could be anything to contaminate her memory. Next, the defense suggests that somehow these clear memories of Maxwell got implanted into the brains of Jane and",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014573",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Maxwell",
      "Carolyn",
      "Jeffrey Epstein",
      "Sean",
      "Sarah",
      "Jane"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22",
      "2009"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "767",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014573"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible text. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}