mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES001/DOJ-OGR-00002511.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "8",
    "document_number": "138",
    "date": "02/04/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 138 Filed 02/04/21 Page 8 of 26\nresolved the allegations against himself and any potential co-conspirator. Faced with significant public pressure, the government broke that agreement and brought an indictment against Epstein, and only Epstein, in 2016. The charges were ultimately dismissed because Epstein died while in federal custody. Left with no fish to attempt to fry, the government, belatedly, turned to Ms. Maxwell.\nIt is inexcusable that decades have passed while the government investigated Epstein, resolved the allegations against him by plea and non-prosecution agreements, and then changed course when these agreements were attacked by plaintiffs' lawyers who fueled the media fenzy. This dithering has allowed memories to be corrupted, conflated, and confabulated. Documents have been destroyed, altered, and lost. Witnesses have died, moved, and become afraid of discussing these matters for fear of media vilification or, as with Ms. Maxwell, tactical indictment by default. Meanwhile, the Epstein story continues to occupy the public's attention with various iterations and conflations including multiple books, podcasts, and television series available to alleged witnesses, posers, attention-seekers, copy-cats, and opportunists for study and exploitation.\nThe primary guarantees against excessive preindictment delay and the prosecution of overly stale criminal charges are statutes of limitation for criminal offenses. United States v. Lawson, 683 F.2d 688, 694 (2d Cir. 1982). Ms. Maxwell has separately moved to dismiss Counts One through Four of the Indictment because those counts were brought after the expiration of the applicable statute of limitation, 18 U.S.C.A. § 3282, which provides, in relevant part, that \"no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any offense, not capital, unless the indictment is found or the information is instituted within five years next after such offense shall have been committed.\" The government will argue that a much longer statute of limitation applies to the\n3\nDOJ-OGR-00002511",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 138 Filed 02/04/21 Page 8 of 26",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "resolved the allegations against himself and any potential co-conspirator. Faced with significant public pressure, the government broke that agreement and brought an indictment against Epstein, and only Epstein, in 2016. The charges were ultimately dismissed because Epstein died while in federal custody. Left with no fish to attempt to fry, the government, belatedly, turned to Ms. Maxwell.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "It is inexcusable that decades have passed while the government investigated Epstein, resolved the allegations against him by plea and non-prosecution agreements, and then changed course when these agreements were attacked by plaintiffs' lawyers who fueled the media fenzy. This dithering has allowed memories to be corrupted, conflated, and confabulated. Documents have been destroyed, altered, and lost. Witnesses have died, moved, and become afraid of discussing these matters for fear of media vilification or, as with Ms. Maxwell, tactical indictment by default. Meanwhile, the Epstein story continues to occupy the public's attention with various iterations and conflations including multiple books, podcasts, and television series available to alleged witnesses, posers, attention-seekers, copy-cats, and opportunists for study and exploitation.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The primary guarantees against excessive preindictment delay and the prosecution of overly stale criminal charges are statutes of limitation for criminal offenses. United States v. Lawson, 683 F.2d 688, 694 (2d Cir. 1982). Ms. Maxwell has separately moved to dismiss Counts One through Four of the Indictment because those counts were brought after the expiration of the applicable statute of limitation, 18 U.S.C.A. § 3282, which provides, in relevant part, that \"no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any offense, not capital, unless the indictment is found or the information is instituted within five years next after such offense shall have been committed.\" The government will argue that a much longer statute of limitation applies to the",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "3",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00002511",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Epstein",
      "Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "2016",
      "02/04/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "Document 138",
      "683 F.2d 688",
      "18 U.S.C.A. § 3282"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, with references to Jeffrey Epstein and legal proceedings."
}