{ "document_metadata": { "page_number": "20", "document_number": "39-1", "date": "04/01/2021", "document_type": "court document", "has_handwriting": false, "has_stamps": false }, "full_text": "Case 21-58, Document 39-1, 04/01/2021, 3068530, Page20 of 31\nthe files around into a different order. She is stuck looking at one page at a time over a screen three feet away without a lawyer in the same room. These are textbook untenable conditions. Stephens, 447 F. Supp. 3d at 67 (explaining the importance of legal visits and ordering bail during pandemic); Weigand, 2020 WL 5887602, at *2 (ordering bail during pandemic because defendant needed ability to review the discovery in complex, document-heavy case). This is no way to prepare for a trial where the government will be asking for a sentence that will imprison her for the rest of her life. Ex.A\nThis Court has recognized that, after a relatively short time, pretrial detention turns into prohibited, unconstitutional punishment. United States v. Jackson, 823 F.2d 4, 7 (2d Cir. 1987) (“grave due process concerns” are implicated by a seven-month period of pretrial detention); United States v. Melendez-Carrions, 790 F.2d 984, 1008 (2d Cir. 1986) (Feinberg, J. concurring) (“[G]eneral requirements of due process compel us to draw the line [of permissible pretrial detention] well short of [] eight months.”). Under the current conditions, it can hardly be disputed that Ms. Maxwell is being punished, which in itself\n18\nDOJ-OGR-00019848", "text_blocks": [ { "type": "printed", "content": "Case 21-58, Document 39-1, 04/01/2021, 3068530, Page20 of 31", "position": "header" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "the files around into a different order. She is stuck looking at one page at a time over a screen three feet away without a lawyer in the same room. These are textbook untenable conditions. Stephens, 447 F. Supp. 3d at 67 (explaining the importance of legal visits and ordering bail during pandemic); Weigand, 2020 WL 5887602, at *2 (ordering bail during pandemic because defendant needed ability to review the discovery in complex, document-heavy case). This is no way to prepare for a trial where the government will be asking for a sentence that will imprison her for the rest of her life. Ex.A\nThis Court has recognized that, after a relatively short time, pretrial detention turns into prohibited, unconstitutional punishment. United States v. Jackson, 823 F.2d 4, 7 (2d Cir. 1987) (“grave due process concerns” are implicated by a seven-month period of pretrial detention); United States v. Melendez-Carrions, 790 F.2d 984, 1008 (2d Cir. 1986) (Feinberg, J. concurring) (“[G]eneral requirements of due process compel us to draw the line [of permissible pretrial detention] well short of [] eight months.”). Under the current conditions, it can hardly be disputed that Ms. Maxwell is being punished, which in itself", "position": "main content" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "18", "position": "footer" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "DOJ-OGR-00019848", "position": "footer" } ], "entities": { "people": [ "Maxwell", "Jackson", "Melendez-Carrions", "Feinberg" ], "organizations": [ "United States" ], "locations": [], "dates": [ "04/01/2021", "1987", "1986" ], "reference_numbers": [ "Case 21-58", "Document 39-1", "3068530", "447 F. Supp. 3d", "2020 WL 5887602", "823 F.2d 4", "790 F.2d 984", "DOJ-OGR-00019848" ] }, "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell, discussing the conditions of her pretrial detention and referencing relevant legal precedents." }