mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014705.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "19",
    "document_number": "773",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 773 Filed 08/10/22 Page 19 of 29 3136 LCRVMAXT\n\n1 THE COURT: Wow.\n2 MS. MENNINGER: And they are asking, Can we find her responsible for the return flight, but not that flight to New Mexico, where the intent was to engage in sexual activity. That's why I think they have written it with the commas as they are.\n3 THE COURT: Okay.\n4 MS. MENNINGER: So they have to be directed --\n5 THE COURT: Let me try again. Can I get a yes or a no to my question? Is it your legal position that the jury must conclude, in order to convict on this count, that the defendant had to aid in the transportation of the flight to New Mexico?\n6 MS. MENNINGER: I don't believe that -- no, no, it is not my contention.\n7 THE COURT: Thank you.\n8 MS. MENNINGER: And the reason is the indictment does not specify New Mexico. It could be a flight to New York, for example. It could be a flight to New Mexico. It could be any place, the purpose for which was to engage in illegal sexual activity. So it doesn't have to be to New Mexico.\n9 THE COURT: I agree with that.\n10 This is why it's difficult to parse the question without assuming a variety of meanings, and I'm trying to track your comma argument.\n11 MS. MENNINGER: Had they placed the comma after New\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\n\nDOJ-OGR-00014705",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 773 Filed 08/10/22 Page 19 of 29 3136 LCRVMAXT",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 THE COURT: Wow.\n2 MS. MENNINGER: And they are asking, Can we find her responsible for the return flight, but not that flight to New Mexico, where the intent was to engage in sexual activity. That's why I think they have written it with the commas as they are.\n3 THE COURT: Okay.\n4 MS. MENNINGER: So they have to be directed --\n5 THE COURT: Let me try again. Can I get a yes or a no to my question? Is it your legal position that the jury must conclude, in order to convict on this count, that the defendant had to aid in the transportation of the flight to New Mexico?\n6 MS. MENNINGER: I don't believe that -- no, no, it is not my contention.\n7 THE COURT: Thank you.\n8 MS. MENNINGER: And the reason is the indictment does not specify New Mexico. It could be a flight to New York, for example. It could be a flight to New Mexico. It could be any place, the purpose for which was to engage in illegal sexual activity. So it doesn't have to be to New Mexico.\n9 THE COURT: I agree with that.\n10 This is why it's difficult to parse the question without assuming a variety of meanings, and I'm trying to track your comma argument.\n11 MS. MENNINGER: Had they placed the comma after New",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014705",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MS. MENNINGER"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New Mexico",
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "773",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014705"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a discussion between the court and MS. MENNINGER about the interpretation of a legal document. The text is mostly clear, but there is a truncated sentence at the bottom of the page."
}