{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "2",
    "document_number": "440",
    "date": "11/12/21",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 440 Filed 11/12/21 Page 2 of 40\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nPRELIMINARY STATEMENT ........................................................................................................................... 3\n\nARGUMENT ................................................................................................................................................... 3\nI. The Court Should Permit Certain Witnesses to Testify Under Pseudonyms or Using First Names, and Permit the Sealing of Related Exhibits ............................................................................................................................... 3\nA. Applicable Law ................................................................................................................................ 4\nB. The Minor Victims Retain Significant Privacy Interests ............................................................... 7\n1. Minor Victim-1 ........................................................................................................................... 7\n2. Minor Victim-3 ........................................................................................................................... 10\n3. Minor Victim-4 ........................................................................................................................... 12\n4. Minor Victim-6 ........................................................................................................................... 13\nC. The Government’s Proposal Would Protect Those Privacy Interests ............................................ 14\nD. The Defendant Has No Countervailing Interests at Stake, Much Less a Particularized Need for Disclosure ................................................................................................................................... 16\nE. Sealing Related Exhibits is Entirely Appropriate ......................................................................... 19\nII. The Court Should Resolve Litigation Related to Prior Consistent Statements at the Appropriate Time ....................................................................................................................................................... 21\nIII. The Court Should Preclude the Defense from Making Improper Arguments and Proffering Irrelevant Evidence ................................................................................................................................... 22\nA. The Court Should Preclude Evidence and Argument about Investigations of the Defendant ........ 24\nB. Evidence of the Non-Prosecution Agreement is Not Otherwise Admissible for Any Purpose ........ 29\nC. Evidence that the Defendant was Not Charged by the USAO-SDFL is Irrelevant to Minor Victim-4’s Credibility ............................................................................................................................... 31\nD. The Government Should Preclude Testimony from Case Agents About Irrelevant Matters ............ 33\nE. The Government’s Alleged Motives Are Irrelevant ........................................................................ 34\nF. The Court Should Preclude Challenges to the Credibility of Individuals Who Are Not Witnesses at Trial ....................................................................................................................................................... 35\nDOJ-OGR-00006518",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 440 Filed 11/12/21 Page 2 of 40",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "TABLE OF CONTENTS",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ........................................................................................................................... 3\n\nARGUMENT ................................................................................................................................................... 3\nI. The Court Should Permit Certain Witnesses to Testify Under Pseudonyms or Using First Names, and Permit the Sealing of Related Exhibits ............................................................................................................................... 3\nA. Applicable Law ................................................................................................................................ 4\nB. The Minor Victims Retain Significant Privacy Interests ............................................................... 7\n1. Minor Victim-1 ........................................................................................................................... 7\n2. Minor Victim-3 ........................................................................................................................... 10\n3. Minor Victim-4 ........................................................................................................................... 12\n4. Minor Victim-6 ........................................................................................................................... 13\nC. The Government’s Proposal Would Protect Those Privacy Interests ............................................ 14\nD. The Defendant Has No Countervailing Interests at Stake, Much Less a Particularized Need for Disclosure ................................................................................................................................... 16\nE. Sealing Related Exhibits is Entirely Appropriate ......................................................................... 19\nII. The Court Should Resolve Litigation Related to Prior Consistent Statements at the Appropriate Time ....................................................................................................................................................... 21\nIII. The Court Should Preclude the Defense from Making Improper Arguments and Proffering Irrelevant Evidence ................................................................................................................................... 22\nA. The Court Should Preclude Evidence and Argument about Investigations of the Defendant ........ 24\nB. Evidence of the Non-Prosecution Agreement is Not Otherwise Admissible for Any Purpose ........ 29\nC. Evidence that the Defendant was Not Charged by the USAO-SDFL is Irrelevant to Minor Victim-4’s Credibility ............................................................................................................................... 31\nD. The Government Should Preclude Testimony from Case Agents About Irrelevant Matters ............ 33\nE. The Government’s Alleged Motives Are Irrelevant ........................................................................ 34\nF. The Court Should Preclude Challenges to the Credibility of Individuals Who Are Not Witnesses at Trial ....................................................................................................................................................... 35",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00006518",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Minor Victim-1",
      "Minor Victim-3",
      "Minor Victim-4",
      "Minor Victim-6",
      "Defendant"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "USAO-SDFL",
      "DOJ"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "11/12/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 440",
      "DOJ-OGR-00006518"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case. The table of contents suggests that the document discusses issues related to witness testimony, evidence, and privacy interests. The document is well-formatted and free of significant damage or redactions."
}