DOJ-OGR-00001157.json 4.7 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657
  1. {
  2. "document_metadata": {
  3. "page_number": "12",
  4. "document_number": "2017-00330",
  5. "date": null,
  6. "document_type": "court document",
  7. "has_handwriting": false,
  8. "has_stamps": false
  9. },
  10. "full_text": "and that certain of the corroborating documentary evidence does not specifically name Maxwell. Leaving aside the fact that volume is not a reliable proxy for quality, by its very nature, abusive sexual contact is not the type of crime that leaves extensive documentary evidence. But, as described above, . To the extent other corroborative documents refer only to Epstein, they still support these victims' testimony, which will detail their interactions with both the defendant and her co-conspirator, Epstein. In other words, documentary evidence does exist, and as the Court has already found, the combination of multiple victims describing the same scheme, together with documents and other witnesses confirming that those victims did indeed interact with the defendant and Epstein at the times and places they say they did, makes this a strong case. (Tr. 82). Taken together, this evidence confirms that the Government's case remains as strong as it was at the time of the defendant's arrest. Accordingly, this factor continues to weigh heavily in favor of detention. C. The Characteristics of the Defendant The defendant's history and characteristics include significant foreign ties, millions of dollars in cash that she largely transferred to her spouse in the last five years, among other assets, and a demonstrated willingness and sophisticated ability to live in hiding. The bulk of the arguments in the Renewed Bail Motion focus on this factor in a manner that largely rehashes claims that this Court already considered at the July 14, 2020 hearing. Any new information provided was either known by the defense at the time of the initial hearing, assumed to be the case when the Court analyzed this factor at the initial hearing, or, in the case of the defense report regarding",
  11. "text_blocks": [
  12. {
  13. "type": "printed",
  14. "content": "and that certain of the corroborating documentary evidence does not specifically name Maxwell. Leaving aside the fact that volume is not a reliable proxy for quality, by its very nature, abusive sexual contact is not the type of crime that leaves extensive documentary evidence. But, as described above, . To the extent other corroborative documents refer only to Epstein, they still support these victims' testimony, which will detail their interactions with both the defendant and her co-conspirator, Epstein. In other words, documentary evidence does exist, and as the Court has already found, the combination of multiple victims describing the same scheme, together with documents and other witnesses confirming that those victims did indeed interact with the defendant and Epstein at the times and places they say they did, makes this a strong case. (Tr. 82). Taken together, this evidence confirms that the Government's case remains as strong as it was at the time of the defendant's arrest. Accordingly, this factor continues to weigh heavily in favor of detention.",
  15. "position": "top"
  16. },
  17. {
  18. "type": "printed",
  19. "content": "C. The Characteristics of the Defendant",
  20. "position": "middle"
  21. },
  22. {
  23. "type": "printed",
  24. "content": "The defendant's history and characteristics include significant foreign ties, millions of dollars in cash that she largely transferred to her spouse in the last five years, among other assets, and a demonstrated willingness and sophisticated ability to live in hiding. The bulk of the arguments in the Renewed Bail Motion focus on this factor in a manner that largely rehashes claims that this Court already considered at the July 14, 2020 hearing. Any new information provided was either known by the defense at the time of the initial hearing, assumed to be the case when the Court analyzed this factor at the initial hearing, or, in the case of the defense report regarding",
  25. "position": "bottom"
  26. },
  27. {
  28. "type": "printed",
  29. "content": "12",
  30. "position": "footer"
  31. },
  32. {
  33. "type": "printed",
  34. "content": "DOJ-OGR-00001157",
  35. "position": "footer"
  36. }
  37. ],
  38. "entities": {
  39. "people": [
  40. "Maxwell",
  41. "Epstein"
  42. ],
  43. "organizations": [
  44. "Court",
  45. "Government"
  46. ],
  47. "locations": [],
  48. "dates": [
  49. "July 14, 2020"
  50. ],
  51. "reference_numbers": [
  52. "2017-00330",
  53. "DOJ-OGR-00001157"
  54. ]
  55. },
  56. "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case against Maxwell, discussing the strength of the government's case and the characteristics of the defendant. The text is printed, with no handwritten annotations or stamps visible."
  57. }