{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "5",
    "document_number": "387",
    "date": "10/29/21",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 387 Filed 10/29/21 Page 5 of 21\n\nGhislaine Maxwell respectfully moves in limine to exclude evidence related to Accuser-3 because it is not probative of the charged conspiracies and inadmissible under Rule 404(b) and Rule 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. In the alternative, Ms. Maxwell respectfully moves (1) to preclude the government and Accuser-3 from referring to Accuser-3 as a \"minor\" or asserting that she was a \"minor\" at the time of the alleged sex acts, (2) to preclude the government and Accuser-3 from representing that she was \"sexually abused\" by Jeffrey Epstein, and (3) for an appropriate limiting instruction concerning Accuser-3's testimony.\n\nPRELIMINARY STATEMENT\n\nThe government and the defense agree on at least this much about Accuser-3:\n1. She was not a minor in the United Kingdom when she alleges that she was sexually abused by Jeffrey Epstein in 1994-1995;\n2. She cannot establish that Ms. Maxwell or Jeffrey Epstein ever caused, or sought to cause, her to travel while she was a minor; and\n3. She cannot establish that she was a minor in the United States when she alleges that she engaged in sex acts with Jeffrey Epstein at his various residences.\nEven if we assume for the sake of argument that everything Accuser-3 alleges is true (which it is not), she has not alleged any illegal conduct whatsoever, much less conduct \"in furtherance of\" a conspiracy to entice or cause minor girls to travel to engage in unlawful sexual activity with Epstein.\nIt seems evident that the government originally included Accuser-3's allegations in the indictment as evidence of the charged conspiracies because it did not know that she was above the age of consent in the U.K. The government presented Accuser-3's allegations to the grand jury incorrectly assuming that she was a minor and that the alleged sex acts between Epstein and\n\nThis individual is described in the S2 Superseding Indictment as Minor Victim-3. Similarly, we refer to the individuals identified in the indictment as Minor Victim-1 and Minor Victim-2 as Accuser-1 and Accuser-2, respectively.\n\nDOJ-OGR-00005669",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 387 Filed 10/29/21 Page 5 of 21",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Ghislaine Maxwell respectfully moves in limine to exclude evidence related to Accuser-3 because it is not probative of the charged conspiracies and inadmissible under Rule 404(b) and Rule 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. In the alternative, Ms. Maxwell respectfully moves (1) to preclude the government and Accuser-3 from referring to Accuser-3 as a \"minor\" or asserting that she was a \"minor\" at the time of the alleged sex acts, (2) to preclude the government and Accuser-3 from representing that she was \"sexually abused\" by Jeffrey Epstein, and (3) for an appropriate limiting instruction concerning Accuser-3's testimony.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "PRELIMINARY STATEMENT",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The government and the defense agree on at least this much about Accuser-3:\n1. She was not a minor in the United Kingdom when she alleges that she was sexually abused by Jeffrey Epstein in 1994-1995;\n2. She cannot establish that Ms. Maxwell or Jeffrey Epstein ever caused, or sought to cause, her to travel while she was a minor; and\n3. She cannot establish that she was a minor in the United States when she alleges that she engaged in sex acts with Jeffrey Epstein at his various residences.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Even if we assume for the sake of argument that everything Accuser-3 alleges is true (which it is not), she has not alleged any illegal conduct whatsoever, much less conduct \"in furtherance of\" a conspiracy to entice or cause minor girls to travel to engage in unlawful sexual activity with Epstein.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "It seems evident that the government originally included Accuser-3's allegations in the indictment as evidence of the charged conspiracies because it did not know that she was above the age of consent in the U.K. The government presented Accuser-3's allegations to the grand jury incorrectly assuming that she was a minor and that the alleged sex acts between Epstein and",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "This individual is described in the S2 Superseding Indictment as Minor Victim-3. Similarly, we refer to the individuals identified in the indictment as Minor Victim-1 and Minor Victim-2 as Accuser-1 and Accuser-2, respectively.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005669",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ghislaine Maxwell",
      "Jeffrey Epstein",
      "Accuser-3",
      "Accuser-1",
      "Accuser-2",
      "Minor Victim-1",
      "Minor Victim-2",
      "Minor Victim-3"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [
      "United Kingdom",
      "United States"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "10/29/21",
      "1994",
      "1995"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 387",
      "S2 Superseding Indictment",
      "DOJ-OGR-00005669"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ghislaine Maxwell, with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage to the document."
}