{ "document_metadata": { "page_number": "72", "document_number": "465", "date": "11/15/21", "document_type": "court transcript", "has_handwriting": false, "has_stamps": false }, "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 465 Filed 11/15/21 Page 72 of 127 72 LB1TMAX3\nVictims' Rights Act, so we want to confer with victims' counsel on that issue as well before we reach a conclusion on that.\nThe definition set forth in the restitution statute, which is 18 USC 3663(a)(2), for purposes of the section, the term \"victim\" means a person directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of an offense for which restitution may be ordered.\nSo that's the particular issue that we just want to think through before we reach a conclusion on in particular because we're mindful of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. So I apologize, it's not my intention, certainly, to fight the hypothetical, we wanted to be thoughtful about that issue.\nTHE COURT: You will get me your views on that question with respect to restitution, but as I understand your initial point, for purposes, as you said, of the elements of establishing any of the offenses, the government's view is that this individual is not a victim in the sense -- granting that restitution's definition of \"victim\" could be broader than those for whom the government's proof of elements as to the charged account would show to be victims, I think that's the distinction you're trying to draw.\nMS. MOE: Your Honor, our position is that we recognize Minor Victim-3's testimony alone would not satisfy the elements of the conspiracy count in which the overt acts appear, our view is nonetheless that it's direct evidence.\nSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00007123", "text_blocks": [ { "type": "printed", "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 465 Filed 11/15/21 Page 72 of 127 72 LB1TMAX3", "position": "header" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "Victims' Rights Act, so we want to confer with victims' counsel on that issue as well before we reach a conclusion on that.\nThe definition set forth in the restitution statute, which is 18 USC 3663(a)(2), for purposes of the section, the term \"victim\" means a person directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of an offense for which restitution may be ordered.\nSo that's the particular issue that we just want to think through before we reach a conclusion on in particular because we're mindful of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. So I apologize, it's not my intention, certainly, to fight the hypothetical, we wanted to be thoughtful about that issue.", "position": "top" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "THE COURT: You will get me your views on that question with respect to restitution, but as I understand your initial point, for purposes, as you said, of the elements of establishing any of the offenses, the government's view is that this individual is not a victim in the sense -- granting that restitution's definition of \"victim\" could be broader than those for whom the government's proof of elements as to the charged account would show to be victims, I think that's the distinction you're trying to draw.", "position": "middle" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "MS. MOE: Your Honor, our position is that we recognize Minor Victim-3's testimony alone would not satisfy the elements of the conspiracy count in which the overt acts appear, our view is nonetheless that it's direct evidence.", "position": "middle" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300", "position": "footer" }, { "type": "printed", "content": "DOJ-OGR-00007123", "position": "footer" } ], "entities": { "people": [ "MS. MOE" ], "organizations": [ "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C." ], "locations": [], "dates": [ "11/15/21" ], "reference_numbers": [ "1:20-cr-00330-PAE", "Document 465", "18 USC 3663(a)(2)", "DOJ-OGR-00007123" ] }, "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage." }