{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "9",
    "document_number": "388",
    "date": "10/29/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 388 Filed 10/29/21 Page 9 of 14\n\nFlight is, at most, circumstantial evidence of guilt and its probative value \"depends upon the degree of confidence with which four inferences can be drawn: (1) from the defendant's behavior to flight; (2) from flight to consciousness of guilt; (3) from consciousness of guilt to consciousness of guilt concerning the crime charged; and (4) from consciousness of guilt concerning the crime charged to actual guilt of the crime charged.\" Al-Sadawi, 432 F.3d at 424 (quoting Myers, 550 F.2d at 1049). \"Because of the inherent unreliability of evidence of flight, and the danger of prejudice its use may entail, a flight instruction is improper unless the evidence is sufficient to furnish reasonable support for all four of the necessary inferences.\" Myers, 550 F.2d at 1050 (internal citations omitted). An adequate evidentiary predicate \"must include some evidence surrounding the failure to appear ... and must thereby provide the jury with more than an opportunity for mere conjecture and speculation.\" United States v. Sanchez, 790 F.2d 245, 252 (2d Cir. 1986) (internal quotations and citations omitted) (emphasis in original).\n\nII. The Government Should Not Be Permitted to Introduce Evidence of Alleged \"Flight\" or Argue that Ms. Maxwell's Conduct After Epstein's Death Is Proof of Consciousness of Guilt\n\nThe government cannot establish a satisfactory factual predicate for the jury to infer that Ms. Maxwell was, in fact, fleeing or evading law enforcement authorities after the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein, or that her conduct is proof of consciousness of guilt. The reason is simple - those inferences are entirely speculative and demonstrably false. Ms. Maxwell never once left the country after Epstein's arrest, nor has the government produced any evidence that she was planning to flee, despite having received a grand jury subpoena and knowing that she was considered a subject of the ongoing FBI investigation. Instead, she found a permanent residence close to New York where she stayed continuously for seven months before her arrest and remained in regular contact with the prosecutors through her attorneys. As previously discussed, Ms. Maxwell also addressed and rebutted each point that the government referenced in its bail",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 388 Filed 10/29/21 Page 9 of 14",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Flight is, at most, circumstantial evidence of guilt and its probative value \"depends upon the degree of confidence with which four inferences can be drawn: (1) from the defendant's behavior to flight; (2) from flight to consciousness of guilt; (3) from consciousness of guilt to consciousness of guilt concerning the crime charged; and (4) from consciousness of guilt concerning the crime charged to actual guilt of the crime charged.\" Al-Sadawi, 432 F.3d at 424 (quoting Myers, 550 F.2d at 1049). \"Because of the inherent unreliability of evidence of flight, and the danger of prejudice its use may entail, a flight instruction is improper unless the evidence is sufficient to furnish reasonable support for all four of the necessary inferences.\" Myers, 550 F.2d at 1050 (internal citations omitted). An adequate evidentiary predicate \"must include some evidence surrounding the failure to appear ... and must thereby provide the jury with more than an opportunity for mere conjecture and speculation.\" United States v. Sanchez, 790 F.2d 245, 252 (2d Cir. 1986) (internal quotations and citations omitted) (emphasis in original).",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "II. The Government Should Not Be Permitted to Introduce Evidence of Alleged \"Flight\" or Argue that Ms. Maxwell's Conduct After Epstein's Death Is Proof of Consciousness of Guilt",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The government cannot establish a satisfactory factual predicate for the jury to infer that Ms. Maxwell was, in fact, fleeing or evading law enforcement authorities after the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein, or that her conduct is proof of consciousness of guilt. The reason is simple - those inferences are entirely speculative and demonstrably false. Ms. Maxwell never once left the country after Epstein's arrest, nor has the government produced any evidence that she was planning to flee, despite having received a grand jury subpoena and knowing that she was considered a subject of the ongoing FBI investigation. Instead, she found a permanent residence close to New York where she stayed continuously for seven months before her arrest and remained in regular contact with the prosecutors through her attorneys. As previously discussed, Ms. Maxwell also addressed and rebutted each point that the government referenced in its bail",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "6",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005696",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Maxwell",
      "Jeffrey Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "FBI"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "10/29/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 388",
      "DOJ-OGR-00005696"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell, discussing the admissibility of evidence regarding her alleged flight or consciousness of guilt after Jeffrey Epstein's death."
}