{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "6",
    "document_number": "391",
    "date": "10/29/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 391 Filed 10/29/21 Page 6 of 11\n\nIn approximately April 2006 the investigation was concluded. According to the police reports, the investigating detectives believed that they had probable cause to charge Jeffrey Epstein, , and . Ms. Maxwell's name is absent from any charging document or probable cause statement.\n\nThe police reports reflect that a disagreement arose between the police and the state attorney as to how the case was being handled. Essentially, the police believed that Mr. Epstein was not being treated harshly enough and that here had been an excessive amount of delay in the prosecution because of the inaction by the prosecuting attorneys. The disagreements over how the case was being prosecuted became significant and public. The Chief of Police, Mr. Reiter, wrote several letters to the prosecuting attorneys including a letter suggesting that the prosecutors had a conflict of interest. In a letter to one of the alleged victims Chief Reiter wrote: \"I do not feel that justice has been sufficiently served by the indictment that has been issued. Therefore please know that his (sic) matter has been referred to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to determine if violations of federal law have occurred.\"\n\nThe reports and seized documents are a mash-up of a various hearsay sources. More often than not, it is difficult to determine how many multiple layers of hearsay exist with regard to a particular piece of alleged evidence. Significantly, the Palm Beach Police Department Property Receipt/Search Warrant Return (Government Exhibit 295), attached as Exhibit A, is cursory, and reflects items moved in and out of the property department. Detective Recarey is dead, and no record custodian exists that can identify what was (1) seized; (2) what was maintained by the Palm Beach Police Department and by whom; (3) what was returned and (4) what was purportedly transferred to the FBI. Other documents provided to the defense suggest that when the FBI opened packages that were alleged to have contained evidence nothing was inside and\n\n3\n\nDOJ-OGR-00005731",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 391 Filed 10/29/21 Page 6 of 11",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "In approximately April 2006 the investigation was concluded. According to the police reports, the investigating detectives believed that they had probable cause to charge Jeffrey Epstein, , and . Ms. Maxwell's name is absent from any charging document or probable cause statement.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The police reports reflect that a disagreement arose between the police and the state attorney as to how the case was being handled. Essentially, the police believed that Mr. Epstein was not being treated harshly enough and that here had been an excessive amount of delay in the prosecution because of the inaction by the prosecuting attorneys. The disagreements over how the case was being prosecuted became significant and public. The Chief of Police, Mr. Reiter, wrote several letters to the prosecuting attorneys including a letter suggesting that the prosecutors had a conflict of interest. In a letter to one of the alleged victims Chief Reiter wrote: \"I do not feel that justice has been sufficiently served by the indictment that has been issued. Therefore please know that his (sic) matter has been referred to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to determine if violations of federal law have occurred.\"",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The reports and seized documents are a mash-up of a various hearsay sources. More often than not, it is difficult to determine how many multiple layers of hearsay exist with regard to a particular piece of alleged evidence. Significantly, the Palm Beach Police Department Property Receipt/Search Warrant Return (Government Exhibit 295), attached as Exhibit A, is cursory, and reflects items moved in and out of the property department. Detective Recarey is dead, and no record custodian exists that can identify what was (1) seized; (2) what was maintained by the Palm Beach Police Department and by whom; (3) what was returned and (4) what was purportedly transferred to the FBI. Other documents provided to the defense suggest that when the FBI opened packages that were alleged to have contained evidence nothing was inside and",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "3",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005731",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jeffrey Epstein",
      "Ms. Maxwell",
      "Mr. Reiter",
      "Detective Recarey"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Palm Beach Police Department",
      "FBI"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Palm Beach"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "April 2006",
      "10/29/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 391",
      "Government Exhibit 295",
      "Exhibit A",
      "DOJ-OGR-00005731"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case against Jeffrey Epstein. The text is mostly printed, with no handwritten content or stamps visible. The document is page 6 of 11."
}