{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "10",
    "document_number": "286",
    "date": "05/20/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 286 Filed 05/20/21 Page 10 of 14\nconduct involving Accuser-3 was an overt act in furtherance of a conspiracy, it argues that it is entitled to imply that the conduct itself was unlawful. The obvious flaws in this logic are at least threefold. First, the Indictment does not merely imply that the alleged conduct involving Accuser-3 was unlawful; it specifically and falsely characterizes the conduct as “sexual[] abuse[].” Second, as the government points out repeatedly, an overt act in furtherance of a conspiracy need not itself be unlawful. See, e.g., Opp. 161 (“It is axiomatic that a conspiracy does not require a completed substantive crime.”). And third, the government’s reasoning is circular: It argues simultaneously that Accuser-3’s lawful sexual encounters with Epstein demonstrate the existence of a conspiracy, and that the existence of a conspiracy makes those sexual encounters unlawful.\nSince the government concedes that Epstein’s alleged sexual contact with Accuser-3 was consensual and lawful, and that Accuser-3 was above the legal age of consent, the government’s allegation that Ms. Maxwell was complicit in the “sexual[] abuse[]” of Accuser-3 amounts to a knowingly false accusation that she committed a crime. It is hard to conceive of a more inflammatory or prejudicial allegation.\nAlso troubling is the government’s statement that Accuser-3 will testify to her “subjective experience” of her admittedly lawful sexual encounters with Epstein “as traumatic, exploitative, and abusive.” See Opp. 162 n.57 (emphasis added). To the extent that evidence regarding Accuser-3’s involvement in lawful sexual activity in England while she was above the age of legal consent has any relevance whatsoever to an alleged conspiracy to cause underage girls to travel in the United States to engage in illegal sex acts, that relevance certainly does not encompass Accuser-3’s “subjective experience” of her lawful, consensual encounters. The government’s intention to present such testimony further demonstrates that Accuser-3’s function\n7\nDOJ-OGR-00004223",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 286 Filed 05/20/21 Page 10 of 14",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "conduct involving Accuser-3 was an overt act in furtherance of a conspiracy, it argues that it is entitled to imply that the conduct itself was unlawful. The obvious flaws in this logic are at least threefold. First, the Indictment does not merely imply that the alleged conduct involving Accuser-3 was unlawful; it specifically and falsely characterizes the conduct as “sexual[] abuse[].” Second, as the government points out repeatedly, an overt act in furtherance of a conspiracy need not itself be unlawful. See, e.g., Opp. 161 (“It is axiomatic that a conspiracy does not require a completed substantive crime.”). And third, the government’s reasoning is circular: It argues simultaneously that Accuser-3’s lawful sexual encounters with Epstein demonstrate the existence of a conspiracy, and that the existence of a conspiracy makes those sexual encounters unlawful.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Since the government concedes that Epstein’s alleged sexual contact with Accuser-3 was consensual and lawful, and that Accuser-3 was above the legal age of consent, the government’s allegation that Ms. Maxwell was complicit in the “sexual[] abuse[]” of Accuser-3 amounts to a knowingly false accusation that she committed a crime. It is hard to conceive of a more inflammatory or prejudicial allegation.",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Also troubling is the government’s statement that Accuser-3 will testify to her “subjective experience” of her admittedly lawful sexual encounters with Epstein “as traumatic, exploitative, and abusive.” See Opp. 162 n.57 (emphasis added). To the extent that evidence regarding Accuser-3’s involvement in lawful sexual activity in England while she was above the age of legal consent has any relevance whatsoever to an alleged conspiracy to cause underage girls to travel in the United States to engage in illegal sex acts, that relevance certainly does not encompass Accuser-3’s “subjective experience” of her lawful, consensual encounters. The government’s intention to present such testimony further demonstrates that Accuser-3’s function",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "7",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00004223",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Accuser-3",
      "Epstein",
      "Ms. Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "DOJ"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "England",
      "United States"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "05/20/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 286",
      "Opp. 161",
      "Opp. 162 n.57",
      "DOJ-OGR-00004223"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, discussing the government's allegations and evidence regarding Accuser-3's interactions with Jeffrey Epstein."
}