{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "38",
    "document_number": "737",
    "date": "07/22/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 737 Filed 07/22/22 Page 38 of 101 38 M6SQmax1 me is specific and highly technical. Does the preponderance of the evidence demonstrate that the offense to sex traffic Carolyn continued after November 1, 2004 before she turned 18 in early 2005? In other words, does a preponderance of the evidence establish that acts in furtherance of the conspiracy to traffic Carolyn occurred in either November or December 2004? Although Carolyn testified regarding contact earlier in 2004 and after she turned 18 in 2005, there is no evidence, either in the form of testimony or documentary evidence, including the message pads, that demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence conspiratorial conduct during those last two months of 2004 before Carolyn turned 18 in 2005. In those portions of Carolyn's testimony cited by the government, Carolyn stated that she was 18 years old the last time she went to Epstein's house, which would have been in 2005. As Carolyn further explained, she returned more than four or five times to Epstein after she gave birth to her son in March of 2004, and that testimony is supported by message pads entered at trial that show Carolyn called Epstein several times in the summer of 2004: Once in late April or early May again on July 6, and again on July 30. When she did return to Epstein, Carolyn testified Epstein asked if she had younger friends, and she explained during her testimony that at 18 years old, she was too old for him. Carolyn wasn't asked, and her testimony doesn't specifically address, whether she went to SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00011557",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 737 Filed 07/22/22 Page 38 of 101 38",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "M6SQmax1 me is specific and highly technical. Does the preponderance of the evidence demonstrate that the offense to sex traffic Carolyn continued after November 1, 2004 before she turned 18 in early 2005? In other words, does a preponderance of the evidence establish that acts in furtherance of the conspiracy to traffic Carolyn occurred in either November or December 2004? Although Carolyn testified regarding contact earlier in 2004 and after she turned 18 in 2005, there is no evidence, either in the form of testimony or documentary evidence, including the message pads, that demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence conspiratorial conduct during those last two months of 2004 before Carolyn turned 18 in 2005. In those portions of Carolyn's testimony cited by the government, Carolyn stated that she was 18 years old the last time she went to Epstein's house, which would have been in 2005. As Carolyn further explained, she returned more than four or five times to Epstein after she gave birth to her son in March of 2004, and that testimony is supported by message pads entered at trial that show Carolyn called Epstein several times in the summer of 2004: Once in late April or early May again on July 6, and again on July 30. When she did return to Epstein, Carolyn testified Epstein asked if she had younger friends, and she explained during her testimony that at 18 years old, she was too old for him. Carolyn wasn't asked, and her testimony doesn't specifically address, whether she went to",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00011557",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Carolyn",
      "Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "November 1, 2004",
      "2005",
      "March 2004",
      "April 2004",
      "May 2004",
      "July 6, 2004",
      "July 30, 2004",
      "07/22/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "737",
      "DOJ-OGR-00011557"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript or legal document related to a case involving sex trafficking and conspiracy. The text is typed, and there are no visible handwritten notes or stamps. The document includes a header with case information and a footer with the name and contact information of the reporting agency."
}