{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "10 of 15",
    "document_number": "208-2",
    "date": "04/16/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 208-2 Filed 04/16/21 Page 10 of 15\nCase 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 280 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/02/2015 Page 9 of 14\nThe new victims will establish at trial that the Government violated their CVRA rights in the same way as it violated the rights of the other victims. The new victims' participation in this case is important because it appears that the Government intends to raise a factual defense that somehow it did keep Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 properly informed of what was happening in the criminal prosecution. Of course, if four victims all testify consistently that they were not properly informed by the Government (as we believe they will), that provides a stronger case for a CVRA violation.\nIn addition, Jane Doe #3 and Jane Doe #4's participation is relevant to a defense the Court has allowed the Government to raise. The Court has previously ruled that the victims' request for rescission of the NPA \"implicates a fact-sensitive equitable defense which must be considered in the historical factual context of the entire interface between Epstein, the relevant prosecutorial authorities and the federal offense victims - including an assessment of the allegation of a deliberate conspiracy between Epstein and federal prosecutors to keep the victims in the dark on the pendency of negotiations between Epstein and federal authorities until well after the fact and presentation of the non-prosecution agreement to them as a fait accompli.\" DE 189 at 12 n.6 (emphasis added). Jane Doe #3's and Jane Doe #4's participation in this case will help to show what the \"entire interface\" was between the Government and the victims and thus to respond to the Government's estoppel arguments as well as other defenses that it appears to be preparing to raise. See, e.g., DE 62 (52-page response from the Government to the victim's summary judgment motion, raising numerous factually-based and other arguments against the victim's position).\n9\nGIUFFRE 004296 CONFIDENTIAL\nDOJ-OGR-00003745",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 208-2 Filed 04/16/21 Page 10 of 15",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 280 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/02/2015 Page 9 of 14",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The new victims will establish at trial that the Government violated their CVRA rights in the same way as it violated the rights of the other victims. The new victims' participation in this case is important because it appears that the Government intends to raise a factual defense that somehow it did keep Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 properly informed of what was happening in the criminal prosecution. Of course, if four victims all testify consistently that they were not properly informed by the Government (as we believe they will), that provides a stronger case for a CVRA violation.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "In addition, Jane Doe #3 and Jane Doe #4's participation is relevant to a defense the Court has allowed the Government to raise. The Court has previously ruled that the victims' request for rescission of the NPA \"implicates a fact-sensitive equitable defense which must be considered in the historical factual context of the entire interface between Epstein, the relevant prosecutorial authorities and the federal offense victims - including an assessment of the allegation of a deliberate conspiracy between Epstein and federal prosecutors to keep the victims in the dark on the pendency of negotiations between Epstein and federal authorities until well after the fact and presentation of the non-prosecution agreement to them as a fait accompli.\" DE 189 at 12 n.6 (emphasis added). Jane Doe #3's and Jane Doe #4's participation in this case will help to show what the \"entire interface\" was between the Government and the victims and thus to respond to the Government's estoppel arguments as well as other defenses that it appears to be preparing to raise. See, e.g., DE 62 (52-page response from the Government to the victim's summary judgment motion, raising numerous factually-based and other arguments against the victim's position).",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "9",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "GIUFFRE 004296 CONFIDENTIAL",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00003745",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jane Doe #1",
      "Jane Doe #2",
      "Jane Doe #3",
      "Jane Doe #4",
      "Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Government"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "04/16/21",
      "01/02/2015"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "208-2",
      "280",
      "DE 189",
      "DE 62",
      "GIUFFRE 004296",
      "DOJ-OGR-00003745"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case against Epstein, discussing the participation of new victims and their relevance to the case. The document is marked 'CONFIDENTIAL' and contains a reference number 'GIUFFRE 004296' and 'DOJ-OGR-00003745'."
}