mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES002/DOJ-OGR-00005239.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "3",
    "document_number": "351",
    "date": "10/15/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 351 Filed 10/15/21 Page 3 of 4\nPage 3\n\"Given that the hearing provides an opportunity for the Rule 412 movant to detail the evidence he seeks to admit and for the parties to discuss the propriety of its admission, the notice requirement should be seen as serving two purposes: 1) aiding the Court in determining the threshold matter of whether a hearing is necessary; and 2) providing sufficient notice to the nonmovant and victim alike to prepare for and argue against the necessity of any in camera hearing.\" United States v. Smith, 19 Cr. 324 (BAH), 2020 WL 5995100, at *19 (D.D.C. Oct. 9, 2020).\nHere, the Government produced to the defense a witness list, Giglio material, Jencks Act material, and notice pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) by October 11, 2021, or 7 weeks in advance of trial. The Government understands that the Court's schedule for early disclosure of Jencks Act material and early motions in limine was designed, in part, to ensure that any significant issues are resolved substantially in advance of trial. The Government respectfully submits that the Court has \"good cause\" to set an earlier deadline in order to ensure that any issues stemming from Rule 412 litigation are resolved in a timely fashion in advance of trial, including the need for the Government to investigate and meaningfully respond to such sensitive and important issues. See Smith, 2020 WL 5995100, at *19.\nAdditionally, a deadline of 14 days before trial for the defense's Rule 412 motion is not practical in light of the trial schedule. Under the defense schedule, the defense will file their Rule 412 motion on November 15, 2021, and give notice to both the Government and victims. See Fed. R. Evid. 412(c)(1)(D). At some point over the following two weeks—during jury selection and the Thanksgiving holiday—the Government will respond to the motion, and the Court \"must conduct an in camera hearing\" that gives the parties and the victims the right to be heard. See Fed. R. Evid. 412(c)(2). Given that there are multiple victim witnesses and the defense has not yet notified the Government whether it intends to make a Rule 412 motion as to one or more than one\nDOJ-OGR-00005239",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 351 Filed 10/15/21 Page 3 of 4",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Page 3",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "\"Given that the hearing provides an opportunity for the Rule 412 movant to detail the evidence he seeks to admit and for the parties to discuss the propriety of its admission, the notice requirement should be seen as serving two purposes: 1) aiding the Court in determining the threshold matter of whether a hearing is necessary; and 2) providing sufficient notice to the nonmovant and victim alike to prepare for and argue against the necessity of any in camera hearing.\" United States v. Smith, 19 Cr. 324 (BAH), 2020 WL 5995100, at *19 (D.D.C. Oct. 9, 2020).",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Here, the Government produced to the defense a witness list, Giglio material, Jencks Act material, and notice pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) by October 11, 2021, or 7 weeks in advance of trial. The Government understands that the Court's schedule for early disclosure of Jencks Act material and early motions in limine was designed, in part, to ensure that any significant issues are resolved substantially in advance of trial. The Government respectfully submits that the Court has \"good cause\" to set an earlier deadline in order to ensure that any issues stemming from Rule 412 litigation are resolved in a timely fashion in advance of trial, including the need for the Government to investigate and meaningfully respond to such sensitive and important issues. See Smith, 2020 WL 5995100, at *19.",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Additionally, a deadline of 14 days before trial for the defense's Rule 412 motion is not practical in light of the trial schedule. Under the defense schedule, the defense will file their Rule 412 motion on November 15, 2021, and give notice to both the Government and victims. See Fed. R. Evid. 412(c)(1)(D). At some point over the following two weeks—during jury selection and the Thanksgiving holiday—the Government will respond to the motion, and the Court \"must conduct an in camera hearing\" that gives the parties and the victims the right to be heard. See Fed. R. Evid. 412(c)(2). Given that there are multiple victim witnesses and the defense has not yet notified the Government whether it intends to make a Rule 412 motion as to one or more than one",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005239",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [
      "Government",
      "Court"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "D.D.C."
    ],
    "dates": [
      "October 11, 2021",
      "November 15, 2021",
      "Oct. 9, 2020",
      "10/15/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 351",
      "19 Cr. 324 (BAH)",
      "2020 WL 5995100",
      "DOJ-OGR-00005239"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case. The text is mostly printed, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The document is well-formatted and legible."
}