epstein-docs.github.io/results/IMAGES002/DOJ-OGR-00004906.json
2025-10-06 18:37:37 +11:00

55 lines
4.0 KiB
JSON

{
"document_metadata": {
"page_number": "13",
"document_number": "311-1",
"date": "07/02/21",
"document_type": "court transcript",
"has_handwriting": false,
"has_stamps": false
},
"full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 311-1 Filed 07/02/21 Page 13 of 23\n12\nxj3q1gra\nSEALED\nposition to be able to describe the investigation in the way that we have in our submission.\nTHE COURT: Well, that's clear. That's clear. I mean, were I Boies Schiller, I would have -- never mind. We won't say what I would have done.\nSo I'm looking at the protective order itself, and of course not having been privy to any of the materials in the case -- and they're all under seal, so, I mean, I can dissolve the seal and get them, but there are 150 documents there that are under seal for filings, there are multiple documents that are under seal.\nMR. ROSSMILLER: Not to mention all the underlying materials, of course.\nTHE COURT: Not to mention all the underlying materials.\nSo you argue there isn't any truly confidential material in this, this isn't a trade secrets case, and obviously it's not a trade secrets case. It's a libel case. It would seem that the most scurrilous of accusations would have already floated across the face of the complaint. But since Maxwell can't object, how can I know that all this is about is information that would be, you know, embarrassing?\nMR. ROSSMILLER: I would point the Court in the first instance to the definition of \"confidential materials\" in the protective order itself, which describes \"confidential\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300 SDNY_GM_00000864\nDOJ-OGR-00004906",
"text_blocks": [
{
"type": "printed",
"content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 311-1 Filed 07/02/21 Page 13 of 23",
"position": "header"
},
{
"type": "printed",
"content": "12\nxj3q1gra\nSEALED",
"position": "top"
},
{
"type": "printed",
"content": "position to be able to describe the investigation in the way that we have in our submission.\nTHE COURT: Well, that's clear. That's clear. I mean, were I Boies Schiller, I would have -- never mind. We won't say what I would have done.\nSo I'm looking at the protective order itself, and of course not having been privy to any of the materials in the case -- and they're all under seal, so, I mean, I can dissolve the seal and get them, but there are 150 documents there that are under seal for filings, there are multiple documents that are under seal.\nMR. ROSSMILLER: Not to mention all the underlying materials, of course.\nTHE COURT: Not to mention all the underlying materials.\nSo you argue there isn't any truly confidential material in this, this isn't a trade secrets case, and obviously it's not a trade secrets case. It's a libel case. It would seem that the most scurrilous of accusations would have already floated across the face of the complaint. But since Maxwell can't object, how can I know that all this is about is information that would be, you know, embarrassing?\nMR. ROSSMILLER: I would point the Court in the first instance to the definition of \"confidential materials\" in the protective order itself, which describes \"confidential",
"position": "middle"
},
{
"type": "printed",
"content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300 SDNY_GM_00000864\nDOJ-OGR-00004906",
"position": "footer"
}
],
"entities": {
"people": [
"Boies Schiller",
"Maxwell",
"MR. ROSSMILLER"
],
"organizations": [
"Boies Schiller",
"SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
],
"locations": [],
"dates": [
"07/02/21"
],
"reference_numbers": [
"1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
"311-1",
"SDNY_GM_00000864",
"DOJ-OGR-00004906"
]
},
"additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a header and footer. The content is a discussion between the court and MR. ROSSMILLER about a case involving Maxwell. The document is marked as 'SEALED'."
}