{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "23",
    "document_number": "18",
    "date": "07/10/20",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 18 Filed 07/10/20 Page 23 of 26\n\nMoreover, the government overstates the potential for Ms. Maxwell to spend \"decades in prison\" if she is convicted. (Gov. Mem. at 5.) In fact, her likely total exposure even if she were convicted on all counts is 10 years, assuming the Court were to follow the traditional practice in this District and impose concurrent sentences. Although a 10-year sentence would be significant, it is a far cry from the government's forecast, further demonstrating that the government has not met its burden of showing Ms. Maxwell is an actual risk of flight.\n\nThe Government's Case Is Subject to Significant Challenges. In evaluating the strength of the government's case, we note that Ms. Maxwell intends to mount several legal challenges to the indictment, including that: (i) this prosecution is barred by Epstein's September 24, 2007 non-prosecution agreement with the Department of Justice, which covers \"any potential co-conspirators of Epstein\"; (ii) the conspiracy, enticement of minors, and transporting of minors charges are time-barred and otherwise legally flawed; and (iii) the two perjury charges are subject to dismissal on several legal grounds.15 In addition, as we understand from the face of the indictment, the government's case is based primarily on the testimony of three individuals about events that allegedly occurred roughly 25 years ago between 1994 and 1997. It is inherently more difficult to prosecute cases relating to decades-old conduct. These issues further call into question the strength of the government's case, and provide an independent basis justifying release on bail.\n\n15 The defense is also considering whether the government's comments in connection with this case conform to Local Criminal Rule 23.1, and whether to seek appropriate relief from the Court.\n\n19\nDOJ-OGR-00001603",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 18 Filed 07/10/20 Page 23 of 26",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Moreover, the government overstates the potential for Ms. Maxwell to spend \"decades in prison\" if she is convicted. (Gov. Mem. at 5.) In fact, her likely total exposure even if she were convicted on all counts is 10 years, assuming the Court were to follow the traditional practice in this District and impose concurrent sentences. Although a 10-year sentence would be significant, it is a far cry from the government's forecast, further demonstrating that the government has not met its burden of showing Ms. Maxwell is an actual risk of flight.",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Government's Case Is Subject to Significant Challenges. In evaluating the strength of the government's case, we note that Ms. Maxwell intends to mount several legal challenges to the indictment, including that: (i) this prosecution is barred by Epstein's September 24, 2007 non-prosecution agreement with the Department of Justice, which covers \"any potential co-conspirators of Epstein\"; (ii) the conspiracy, enticement of minors, and transporting of minors charges are time-barred and otherwise legally flawed; and (iii) the two perjury charges are subject to dismissal on several legal grounds.15 In addition, as we understand from the face of the indictment, the government's case is based primarily on the testimony of three individuals about events that allegedly occurred roughly 25 years ago between 1994 and 1997. It is inherently more difficult to prosecute cases relating to decades-old conduct. These issues further call into question the strength of the government's case, and provide an independent basis justifying release on bail.",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "15 The defense is also considering whether the government's comments in connection with this case conform to Local Criminal Rule 23.1, and whether to seek appropriate relief from the Court.",
      "position": "footnote"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "19",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00001603",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Maxwell",
      "Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Department of Justice",
      "Court"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "September 24, 2007",
      "1994",
      "1997",
      "07/10/20"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "Document 18",
      "DOJ-OGR-00001603"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell. The text is well-formatted and printed, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The document includes a header with case information and a footer with a page number and a reference number."
}