{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "5",
    "document_number": "53",
    "date": "09/03/19",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 53 Filed 09/03/19 Page 5 of 86 5 J8RsEPS1\n\n1 today, I don't think it would be very significant.\n2 On a somewhat more serious note, don't quote me on\n3 this, but it is my understanding that one of the authors of\n4 that article is himself counsel in one of the Epstein-related\n5 cases. I was surprised to learn that very recently. I'm\n6 certain it is true. I was also surprised that that aspect was\n7 not disclosed in the Law Journal.\n8 But in any event, I think you know where I'm heading.\n9 I respectfully disagree with the Law Journal piece. I was\n10 saying that the government's motion is relatively\n11 straightforward, and in my view, a public hearing is clearly,\n12 nevertheless, the preferred vehicle for its resolution. I'm\n13 still convinced of that.\n14 A few may differ on this, but public hearings are\n15 exactly what judges do. Hearings promote transparency and they\n16 provide the court with insights and information which the court\n17 may not otherwise be aware of.\n18 The victims have been included in the proceeding today\n19 both because of their relevant experiences and because they\n20 should always be involved before rather than after the fact.\n21 Indictment 19 CR 490 charges Jeffrey Epstein with sex\n22 trafficking and with conspiracy to commit sex trafficking. The\n23 U.S. Attorney, on August 19, 2019, requested that the court\n24 approve the government's proposed order of nolle prosequi. I\n25 think that's a rough justice. That means nolle prosequi,\n\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300\n\nDOJ-OGR-00000643",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 53 Filed 09/03/19 Page 5 of 86 5 J8RsEPS1",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "today, I don't think it would be very significant.\nOn a somewhat more serious note, don't quote me on\nthis, but it is my understanding that one of the authors of\nthat article is himself counsel in one of the Epstein-related\ncases. I was surprised to learn that very recently. I'm\ncertain it is true. I was also surprised that that aspect was\nnot disclosed in the Law Journal.\nBut in any event, I think you know where I'm heading.\nI respectfully disagree with the Law Journal piece. I was\nsaying that the government's motion is relatively\nstraightforward, and in my view, a public hearing is clearly,\nnevertheless, the preferred vehicle for its resolution. I'm\nstill convinced of that.\nA few may differ on this, but public hearings are\nexactly what judges do. Hearings promote transparency and they\nprovide the court with insights and information which the court\nmay not otherwise be aware of.\nThe victims have been included in the proceeding today\nboth because of their relevant experiences and because they\nshould always be involved before rather than after the fact.\nIndictment 19 CR 490 charges Jeffrey Epstein with sex\ntrafficking and with conspiracy to commit sex trafficking. The\nU.S. Attorney, on August 19, 2019, requested that the court\napprove the government's proposed order of nolle prosequi. I\nthink that's a rough justice. That means nolle prosequi,",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.\n(212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00000643",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jeffrey Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "U.S. Attorney",
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "August 19, 2019",
      "09/03/19"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:19-cr-00490-RMB",
      "Document 53",
      "19 CR 490",
      "DOJ-OGR-00000643"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript or legal document related to the case of Jeffrey Epstein. The text is typed and there are no visible handwritten notes or stamps. The document is from the Southern District of New York."
}