mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014719.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "3",
    "document_number": "775",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 775 Filed 08/10/22 Page 3 of 16 3149 LCSCMAXT\n\n1    there can be no error in referring the jury to a correct legal instruction. And so no relief is appropriate here.\n2    At bottom, your Honor, the jury asked a question and nothing more. There is no reason to speculate about what the\n3    jury might be concluding. The jury has been accurately instructed on the law and that's all that's required here.\n4    Going beyond that to speculate about the jury's deliberations and compound speculation upon speculation to send back\n5    confusing legal instructions would compound the problem here. The simple course is exactly the course the Court took\n6    yesterday, which is to refer the jury to a thorough and complete and accurate legal instruction. There can't be any\n7    dispute that the instructions that the Court has given are accurate, and that's all that's required here.\n8    THE COURT: I suppose an additional point, just looking at the -- I mean, the defense's new proposed instruction talks\n9    about Count Two, which wasn't asked about. Also, it has -- so it has three paragraphs. The first one is about Count Two,\n10   which wasn't asked about. There is a second paragraph. And then the third paragraph I think is just wrong, an intent\n11   that Jane engaged in sexual activity in any state other than New York cannot form the basis of these elements.\n12   That would suggest it may have no relevance. This is the same discussion we've had a couple of times, Mr. Everdell.\n13   Sexual activity with respect to Jane in New Mexico under the age of 17\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00014719",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 775 Filed 08/10/22 Page 3 of 16 3149 LCSCMAXT",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1    there can be no error in referring the jury to a correct legal instruction. And so no relief is appropriate here.\n2    At bottom, your Honor, the jury asked a question and nothing more. There is no reason to speculate about what the\n3    jury might be concluding. The jury has been accurately instructed on the law and that's all that's required here.\n4    Going beyond that to speculate about the jury's deliberations and compound speculation upon speculation to send back\n5    confusing legal instructions would compound the problem here. The simple course is exactly the course the Court took\n6    yesterday, which is to refer the jury to a thorough and complete and accurate legal instruction. There can't be any\n7    dispute that the instructions that the Court has given are accurate, and that's all that's required here.\n8    THE COURT: I suppose an additional point, just looking at the -- I mean, the defense's new proposed instruction talks\n9    about Count Two, which wasn't asked about. Also, it has -- so it has three paragraphs. The first one is about Count Two,\n10   which wasn't asked about. There is a second paragraph. And then the third paragraph I think is just wrong, an intent\n11   that Jane engaged in sexual activity in any state other than New York cannot form the basis of these elements.\n12   That would suggest it may have no relevance. This is the same discussion we've had a couple of times, Mr. Everdell.\n13   Sexual activity with respect to Jane in New Mexico under the age of 17",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014719",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jane",
      "Mr. Everdell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York",
      "New Mexico"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "775",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014719"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}