{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "41",
    "document_number": "293-1",
    "date": "05/25/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 293-1 Filed 05/25/21 Page 41 of 349\nthey found computer monitors and keyboards in the home, as well as disconnected surveillance cameras, but the computer equipment itself—including video recordings and other electronic storage media—were gone. Nonetheless, the PBPD retrieved some evidence from Epstein's home, including notepads on which Epstein's assistants documented messages from many girls over a two-year span returning phone calls to confirm appointments. The police also found numerous photographs of naked young females of indeterminate age. Police photographs taken of the interior of Epstein's home corroborated the victims' descriptions to police of the layout of the home and master bedroom and bathroom area. The police also found massage tables and oils, one victim's high school transcript, and items the police believed to be sex toys.\nB. The State Attorney's Office Decides to Present the Case to a State Grand Jury\nState Attorney Barry Krischer explained to OPR that the Epstein case was unusual in that police brought the case to his office without having made an arrest. Krischer was unfamiliar with Epstein, and the case was assigned to the Crimes Against Children Unit. PBPD Chief Michael Reiter stated in a 2009 civil deposition that when the PBPD initially brought the case to the State Attorney's Office in 2005, Krischer was supportive of the investigation and told Reiter, \"Let's go for it,\" because, given the nature of the allegations, Epstein was \"somebody we have to stop.\" Krischer told OPR, however, that both the detectives and the prosecutors came to recognize that \"there were witness problems.\"\nAssistant State Attorney and Crimes Against Children Unit Chief Lanna Belohlavek told OPR that she and an experienced Assistant State Attorney who initially worked with her on the case \"were at a disagreement\" with the PBPD \"over what the state . . . could ethically charge.\" According to Belohlavek, she did not believe the evidence the police presented would satisfy the elements of proof required to charge Epstein with the two felony crimes the police wanted filed, unlawful sexual activity with a minor (Florida Statute § 794.05(1)) and lewd and lascivious molestation of a minor (Florida Statute § 800.04(5)), and the police \"were not happy with that.\"8 In addition, victims had given contradictory statements to police, and the original complainant, who could have supported a charge requiring sexual offender registration, recanted her allegation of sexual contact. Belohlavek offered Epstein a resolution that would result in a five-year term of probation, which he rejected.9\nRecords publicly released by the State Attorney's Office show that, beginning in early 2006, attorneys for Epstein sought to persuade the state prosecutors to allow Epstein to plead \"no contest\" rather than guilty. To that end, the defense team aggressively investigated victims and presented the State Attorney's Office with voluminous material in an effort to undermine some of the victims' credibility, including criminal records, victims' social media postings (such as MySpace pages) about their own sexual activity and drug use, and victim statements that appeared to undercut allegations of criminal activity and Epstein's knowledge of victims' ages. Krischer\n8 Belohlavek stated that she did not consider charging procurement of a minor for prostitution—the charge Epstein ultimately pled to pursuant to the NPA—because the police had not presented it.\n9 In April 2006, the State Attorney's Office offered Epstein an opportunity to plead guilty to the third degree felony of aggravated assault with the intent to commit a felony, with adjudication withheld and five years of probation with no unsupervised contact with minors.\n14\nDOJ-OGR-00004338",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 293-1 Filed 05/25/21 Page 41 of 349",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "they found computer monitors and keyboards in the home, as well as disconnected surveillance cameras, but the computer equipment itself—including video recordings and other electronic storage media—were gone. Nonetheless, the PBPD retrieved some evidence from Epstein's home, including notepads on which Epstein's assistants documented messages from many girls over a two-year span returning phone calls to confirm appointments. The police also found numerous photographs of naked young females of indeterminate age. Police photographs taken of the interior of Epstein's home corroborated the victims' descriptions to police of the layout of the home and master bedroom and bathroom area. The police also found massage tables and oils, one victim's high school transcript, and items the police believed to be sex toys.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "B. The State Attorney's Office Decides to Present the Case to a State Grand Jury",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "State Attorney Barry Krischer explained to OPR that the Epstein case was unusual in that police brought the case to his office without having made an arrest. Krischer was unfamiliar with Epstein, and the case was assigned to the Crimes Against Children Unit. PBPD Chief Michael Reiter stated in a 2009 civil deposition that when the PBPD initially brought the case to the State Attorney's Office in 2005, Krischer was supportive of the investigation and told Reiter, \"Let's go for it,\" because, given the nature of the allegations, Epstein was \"somebody we have to stop.\" Krischer told OPR, however, that both the detectives and the prosecutors came to recognize that \"there were witness problems.\"",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Assistant State Attorney and Crimes Against Children Unit Chief Lanna Belohlavek told OPR that she and an experienced Assistant State Attorney who initially worked with her on the case \"were at a disagreement\" with the PBPD \"over what the state . . . could ethically charge.\" According to Belohlavek, she did not believe the evidence the police presented would satisfy the elements of proof required to charge Epstein with the two felony crimes the police wanted filed, unlawful sexual activity with a minor (Florida Statute § 794.05(1)) and lewd and lascivious molestation of a minor (Florida Statute § 800.04(5)), and the police \"were not happy with that.\"8 In addition, victims had given contradictory statements to police, and the original complainant, who could have supported a charge requiring sexual offender registration, recanted her allegation of sexual contact. Belohlavek offered Epstein a resolution that would result in a five-year term of probation, which he rejected.9",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Records publicly released by the State Attorney's Office show that, beginning in early 2006, attorneys for Epstein sought to persuade the state prosecutors to allow Epstein to plead \"no contest\" rather than guilty. To that end, the defense team aggressively investigated victims and presented the State Attorney's Office with voluminous material in an effort to undermine some of the victims' credibility, including criminal records, victims' social media postings (such as MySpace pages) about their own sexual activity and drug use, and victim statements that appeared to undercut allegations of criminal activity and Epstein's knowledge of victims' ages. Krischer",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "8 Belohlavek stated that she did not consider charging procurement of a minor for prostitution—the charge Epstein ultimately pled to pursuant to the NPA—because the police had not presented it.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "9 In April 2006, the State Attorney's Office offered Epstein an opportunity to plead guilty to the third degree felony of aggravated assault with the intent to commit a felony, with adjudication withheld and five years of probation with no unsupervised contact with minors.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "14",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00004338",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Barry Krischer",
      "Michael Reiter",
      "Lanna Belohlavek",
      "Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "PBPD",
      "State Attorney's Office",
      "Crimes Against Children Unit",
      "OPR"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "05/25/21",
      "2005",
      "2009",
      "April 2006"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "293-1",
      "794.05(1)",
      "800.04(5)",
      "DOJ-OGR-00004338"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the Jeffrey Epstein case. The text is printed and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes. The document is page 41 of 349."
}