mirror of
https://github.com/epstein-docs/epstein-docs.github.io.git
synced 2025-12-10 04:01:31 -06:00
56 lines
3.8 KiB
JSON
56 lines
3.8 KiB
JSON
{
|
|
"document_metadata": {
|
|
"page_number": "204",
|
|
"document_number": "753",
|
|
"date": "08/10/22",
|
|
"document_type": "court transcript",
|
|
"has_handwriting": false,
|
|
"has_stamps": false
|
|
},
|
|
"full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 753 Filed 08/10/22 Page 204 of 264 1645 LC7VMAX7 Carolyn - cross 1 THE COURT: Okay. Should I look at 33? 2 MR. PAGLIUCA: Yes, 33. The first inconsistency with 3 the direct testimony is the date, July of 2002. 4 THE COURT: I don't know -- so again, return to -- 5 what's the inconsistency? 6 MR. PAGLIUCA: Well, the indictment says 2001. In her 7 direct testimony she said 2001, and on the cross-examination, 8 she admitted to 2002. 9 THE COURT: So you have to use a full sentence so I 10 can track you. She said the first incident was in 2001. 11 MR. PAGLIUCA: Yes. 12 THE COURT: She then talked about 100 additional 13 incidents -- 14 MR. PAGLIUCA: Right. 15 THE COURT: -- over the course of at least a couple of 16 years. So what's inconsistent in July of 2002, she again 17 returned to? 18 MR. PAGLIUCA: This is chronological through this 19 complaint. This complaint goes from -- 2002 is the beginning 20 spot, and goes through 2003. So the entirety of the allegation 21 is that these events occurred between 2002 and 2003, not 2001 22 and 2004. And so this is impeachment on the time frame that is 23 alleged in the indictment and testified to by the witness on 24 direct examination. 25 THE COURT: Is there a paragraph that talks about the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00018802",
|
|
"text_blocks": [
|
|
{
|
|
"type": "printed",
|
|
"content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 753 Filed 08/10/22 Page 204 of 264 1645 LC7VMAX7 Carolyn - cross",
|
|
"position": "header"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"type": "printed",
|
|
"content": "1 THE COURT: Okay. Should I look at 33? 2 MR. PAGLIUCA: Yes, 33. The first inconsistency with 3 the direct testimony is the date, July of 2002. 4 THE COURT: I don't know -- so again, return to -- 5 what's the inconsistency? 6 MR. PAGLIUCA: Well, the indictment says 2001. In her 7 direct testimony she said 2001, and on the cross-examination, 8 she admitted to 2002. 9 THE COURT: So you have to use a full sentence so I 10 can track you. She said the first incident was in 2001. 11 MR. PAGLIUCA: Yes. 12 THE COURT: She then talked about 100 additional 13 incidents -- 14 MR. PAGLIUCA: Right. 15 THE COURT: -- over the course of at least a couple of 16 years. So what's inconsistent in July of 2002, she again 17 returned to? 18 MR. PAGLIUCA: This is chronological through this 19 complaint. This complaint goes from -- 2002 is the beginning 20 spot, and goes through 2003. So the entirety of the allegation 21 is that these events occurred between 2002 and 2003, not 2001 22 and 2004. And so this is impeachment on the time frame that is 23 alleged in the indictment and testified to by the witness on 24 direct examination. 25 THE COURT: Is there a paragraph that talks about the",
|
|
"position": "main content"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"type": "printed",
|
|
"content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
|
|
"position": "footer"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"type": "printed",
|
|
"content": "DOJ-OGR-00018802",
|
|
"position": "footer"
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"entities": {
|
|
"people": [
|
|
"MR. PAGLIUCA"
|
|
],
|
|
"organizations": [
|
|
"SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
|
|
],
|
|
"locations": [],
|
|
"dates": [
|
|
"July of 2002",
|
|
"2001",
|
|
"2002",
|
|
"2003",
|
|
"2004",
|
|
"08/10/22"
|
|
],
|
|
"reference_numbers": [
|
|
"1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
|
|
"753",
|
|
"DOJ-OGR-00018802"
|
|
]
|
|
},
|
|
"additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a discussion between the court and Mr. Pagliuca about inconsistencies in a witness's testimony regarding the date of an incident. The document is well-formatted and easy to read."
|
|
} |