{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "5",
    "document_number": "380",
    "date": "10/29/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 380 Filed 10/29/21 Page 5 of 54\n\nprotect against unnecessary public disclosure of their identities, in order to protect the Minor Victims from potential harassment from the media and others, undue embarrassment, and other adverse consequences.\n\nSpecifically, the Government requests that (1) that Minor Victim-1, Minor Victim-3, and certain witnesses related to them be referred to at trial using only pseudonyms; (2) Minor Victim-4, Minor Victim-6, and certain witnesses related to them be referred to at trial using only their first names; (3) the Court preclude the defense from eliciting personally identifying details of those witnesses; and (4) the Court seal exhibits that contain the first and/or last names of witnesses which are not otherwise permitted to be stated at trial. Below, we address the applicable law, before turning to the specific relief the Government requests in this case.1\n\nA. Applicable Law\n\nThe Confrontation Clause guarantees defendants the right to cross-examine witnesses who testify against them. See, e.g., United States v. Figueroa, 548 F.3d 222, 227 (2d Cir. 2008). This right, however, is not absolute. A defendant's rights under the Confrontation Clause must yield to accommodate other legitimate interests in the criminal trial process. See, e.g., id. For instance, trial courts have \"wide latitude . . . to impose reasonable limits . . . on . . . cross-examination based on concerns about, among other things, harassment, prejudice, . . . or the witness's safety.\" United States v. Al Farekh, 810 F. App'x 21, 25 (2d Cir. 2020) (summary order).\n\n1 Simultaneously with the filing of this motion, the Government is filing a sealed letter providing the names of the Minor Victims and witnesses identified in this section, along with certain other personal information. The Government requests that the defense omit identifying information from its response brief or permit the Government an opportunity to seek necessary redactions or sealing.\n\n4\n\nDOJ-OGR-00005398",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 380 Filed 10/29/21 Page 5 of 54",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "protect against unnecessary public disclosure of their identities, in order to protect the Minor Victims from potential harassment from the media and others, undue embarrassment, and other adverse consequences.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Specifically, the Government requests that (1) that Minor Victim-1, Minor Victim-3, and certain witnesses related to them be referred to at trial using only pseudonyms; (2) Minor Victim-4, Minor Victim-6, and certain witnesses related to them be referred to at trial using only their first names; (3) the Court preclude the defense from eliciting personally identifying details of those witnesses; and (4) the Court seal exhibits that contain the first and/or last names of witnesses which are not otherwise permitted to be stated at trial. Below, we address the applicable law, before turning to the specific relief the Government requests in this case.1",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A. Applicable Law",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Confrontation Clause guarantees defendants the right to cross-examine witnesses who testify against them. See, e.g., United States v. Figueroa, 548 F.3d 222, 227 (2d Cir. 2008). This right, however, is not absolute. A defendant's rights under the Confrontation Clause must yield to accommodate other legitimate interests in the criminal trial process. See, e.g., id. For instance, trial courts have \"wide latitude . . . to impose reasonable limits . . . on . . . cross-examination based on concerns about, among other things, harassment, prejudice, . . . or the witness's safety.\" United States v. Al Farekh, 810 F. App'x 21, 25 (2d Cir. 2020) (summary order).",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 Simultaneously with the filing of this motion, the Government is filing a sealed letter providing the names of the Minor Victims and witnesses identified in this section, along with certain other personal information. The Government requests that the defense omit identifying information from its response brief or permit the Government an opportunity to seek necessary redactions or sealing.",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "4",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005398",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [
      "Government",
      "Court"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "10/29/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 380",
      "DOJ-OGR-00005398"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case, with a focus on protecting the identities of minor victims and witnesses. The text is well-formatted and legible, with no visible redactions or damage."
}