{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "5",
    "document_number": "120",
    "date": "01/25/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 120 Filed 01/25/21 Page 5 of 19\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\nMs. Maxwell, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 8(a) and 14, requests that the Court enter an order severing Counts Five and Six of the Superseding Indictment (\"Indictment\") from Counts One through Four because these Counts have been improperly joined and a joint trial would result in substantial prejudice to Ms. Maxwell.\n\nCounts Five and Six of the Indictment allege that Ms. Maxwell made materially false statements at two civil depositions in 2016 that were part of a defamation action brought against her more than twenty years after the conduct alleged in Counts One through Four supposedly took place (1994-1997). The plaintiff in the defamation action, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, made wild and false accusations that she had been sexually trafficked by Epstein and Ms. Maxwell to dozens of famous politicians, professors, foreign leaders, and others. When Ms. Maxwell denied these allegations as false, Giuffre sued for defamation. Discovery conducted in the defamation action established that Giuffre's stories, sold to tabloids for large sums of money, were in fact false. Those accused by Ms. Giuffre, Professor Alan Dershowitz, for example, denounced her as a \"serial liar.\" Regardless, Ms. Giuffre is not one of the three accusers identified in Counts One through Four of the Superseding Indictment and her claims relate to a different time period entirely. Allowing Counts Five and Six to be tried along with Counts One through Four will significantly prejudice Ms. Maxwell because it will allow the government to introduce testimony of alleged sexual abuse that purportedly occurred outside of the time period alleged in Counts One through Four, despite the fact that Ms. Maxwell (unlike Jeffrey Epstein) was never criminally charged with that conduct. As a result, the jury may convict Ms. Maxwell of Counts One through Four based on an improper inference of criminal propensity.\n\nFurthermore, the Court and the jury and the Court will have to resolve numerous complex legal and factual issues in connection with the perjury charges that will lengthen and complicate\n\n1\n\nDOJ-OGR-00002283",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 120 Filed 01/25/21 Page 5 of 19",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "INTRODUCTION",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Ms. Maxwell, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 8(a) and 14, requests that the Court enter an order severing Counts Five and Six of the Superseding Indictment (\"Indictment\") from Counts One through Four because these Counts have been improperly joined and a joint trial would result in substantial prejudice to Ms. Maxwell.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Counts Five and Six of the Indictment allege that Ms. Maxwell made materially false statements at two civil depositions in 2016 that were part of a defamation action brought against her more than twenty years after the conduct alleged in Counts One through Four supposedly took place (1994-1997). The plaintiff in the defamation action, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, made wild and false accusations that she had been sexually trafficked by Epstein and Ms. Maxwell to dozens of famous politicians, professors, foreign leaders, and others. When Ms. Maxwell denied these allegations as false, Giuffre sued for defamation. Discovery conducted in the defamation action established that Giuffre's stories, sold to tabloids for large sums of money, were in fact false. Those accused by Ms. Giuffre, Professor Alan Dershowitz, for example, denounced her as a \"serial liar.\" Regardless, Ms. Giuffre is not one of the three accusers identified in Counts One through Four of the Superseding Indictment and her claims relate to a different time period entirely. Allowing Counts Five and Six to be tried along with Counts One through Four will significantly prejudice Ms. Maxwell because it will allow the government to introduce testimony of alleged sexual abuse that purportedly occurred outside of the time period alleged in Counts One through Four, despite the fact that Ms. Maxwell (unlike Jeffrey Epstein) was never criminally charged with that conduct. As a result, the jury may convict Ms. Maxwell of Counts One through Four based on an improper inference of criminal propensity.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Furthermore, the Court and the jury and the Court will have to resolve numerous complex legal and factual issues in connection with the perjury charges that will lengthen and complicate",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00002283",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Maxwell",
      "Virginia Roberts Giuffre",
      "Epstein",
      "Alan Dershowitz",
      "Jeffrey Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "01/25/21",
      "1994",
      "1997",
      "2016"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "Document 120",
      "DOJ-OGR-00002283"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell. The text is printed and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes. The document is page 5 of 19."
}