{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "86",
    "document_number": "465",
    "date": "11/15/21",
    "document_type": "court transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 465 Filed 11/15/21 Page 86 of 127\nLB1TMAX3\n1 MS. MOE: That's correct, your Honor.\n2 THE COURT: So I need to get something in writing on\n3 the trafficking count, because you haven't raised it directly\n4 before and the defense hasn't had an opportunity to respond to\n5 it before.\n6 With respect to how this has been argued, I don't\n7 think there's a basis to exclude entirely, but let me tell you\n8 my thinking and I will hear a reaction to it.\n9 The evidence related to alleged Victim-3, as the\n10 government describes her, is not direct evidence of the\n11 conspiracy charged in Counts One and Three of the indictment.\n12 Counts One and Three charge the defendant with conspiracy to\n13 entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts and\n14 conspiracy to transport minors with intent to engage in\n15 criminal sexual activity.\n16 The parties agree that alleged Victim-3 was 17 at the\n17 time she was acquainted with the defendant and Epstein in\n18 London, England where the age of consent is 16. Moreover, she\n19 can't recall, and the government wouldn't be able to establish\n20 that she was invited to travel with the defendant when she was\n21 17 or 18. And because the alleged victim was over the age of\n22 consent in all relevant jurisdictions and, therefore, any\n23 alleged sexual activity was lawful, the alleged conduct does\n24 not arise out of the same transactions or series of\n25 transactions as the charged offense. It's not inextricably\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\nDOJ-OGR-00007137",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 465 Filed 11/15/21 Page 86 of 127",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LB1TMAX3",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 MS. MOE: That's correct, your Honor.\n2 THE COURT: So I need to get something in writing on\n3 the trafficking count, because you haven't raised it directly\n4 before and the defense hasn't had an opportunity to respond to\n5 it before.\n6 With respect to how this has been argued, I don't\n7 think there's a basis to exclude entirely, but let me tell you\n8 my thinking and I will hear a reaction to it.\n9 The evidence related to alleged Victim-3, as the\n10 government describes her, is not direct evidence of the\n11 conspiracy charged in Counts One and Three of the indictment.\n12 Counts One and Three charge the defendant with conspiracy to\n13 entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts and\n14 conspiracy to transport minors with intent to engage in\n15 criminal sexual activity.\n16 The parties agree that alleged Victim-3 was 17 at the\n17 time she was acquainted with the defendant and Epstein in\n18 London, England where the age of consent is 16. Moreover, she\n19 can't recall, and the government wouldn't be able to establish\n20 that she was invited to travel with the defendant when she was\n21 17 or 18. And because the alleged victim was over the age of\n22 consent in all relevant jurisdictions and, therefore, any\n23 alleged sexual activity was lawful, the alleged conduct does\n24 not arise out of the same transactions or series of\n25 transactions as the charged offense. It's not inextricably",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00007137",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "MOE",
      "Victim-3",
      "Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "London",
      "England"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "11/15/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 465",
      "DOJ-OGR-00007137"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}