mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES002/DOJ-OGR-00005250.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "1",
    "document_number": "355",
    "date": "10/18/2021",
    "document_type": "Letter",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 355 Filed 10/18/21 Page 1 of 5\nU.S Department of Justice\nUnited States Attorney\nSouthern District of New York\nThe Silvio J. Mollo Building\nOne Saint Andrew's Plaza\nNew York, New York 10007\nOctober 18, 2021\nBY ECF\nThe Honorable Alison J. Nathan\nUnited States District Court\nSouthern District of New York\nUnited States Courthouse\n40 Foley Square\nNew York, New York 10007\nRe: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)\nDear Judge Nathan:\nThe Government respectfully submits this letter pursuant to the Court's Order dated October 14, 2021 (Dkt. No. 343) directing the Government to respond to the defendant's motion for an order granting limited counsel-conducted voir dire and individual sequestered voir dire (Dkt. No. 341).\nI. Attorney Voir Dire Is Not Warranted\nNone of the defendant's arguments warrant departing from the well-settled practice in this District of Court-led voir dire. The Court is well-equipped to thoroughly question prospective jurors and to appropriately filter questions prepared by the parties.\nIt is well established that \"[a] district court is 'accorded ample discretion in determining how best to conduct . . . voir dire.'\" United States v. Lawes, 292 F.3d 123, 128 (2d Cir. 2002) (quoting Rosales-Lopez v. United States, 451 U.S. 182, 189 (1981)); accord United States v. Quinones, 511 F.3d 289, 299 (2d Cir. 2007). As a general matter, \"[v]oir dire is necessarily a matter in which the trial court has extremely broad discretion,\" and \"federal trial judges are not required to ask every question that counsel—even all counsel—believes is appropriate.\" Lawes,\nDOJ-OGR-00005250",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 355 Filed 10/18/21 Page 1 of 5",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "U.S Department of Justice\nUnited States Attorney\nSouthern District of New York\nThe Silvio J. Mollo Building\nOne Saint Andrew's Plaza\nNew York, New York 10007",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "October 18, 2021",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "BY ECF\nThe Honorable Alison J. Nathan\nUnited States District Court\nSouthern District of New York\nUnited States Courthouse\n40 Foley Square\nNew York, New York 10007",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Dear Judge Nathan:",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Government respectfully submits this letter pursuant to the Court's Order dated October 14, 2021 (Dkt. No. 343) directing the Government to respond to the defendant's motion for an order granting limited counsel-conducted voir dire and individual sequestered voir dire (Dkt. No. 341).",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "I. Attorney Voir Dire Is Not Warranted",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "None of the defendant's arguments warrant departing from the well-settled practice in this District of Court-led voir dire. The Court is well-equipped to thoroughly question prospective jurors and to appropriately filter questions prepared by the parties.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "It is well established that \"[a] district court is 'accorded ample discretion in determining how best to conduct . . . voir dire.'\" United States v. Lawes, 292 F.3d 123, 128 (2d Cir. 2002) (quoting Rosales-Lopez v. United States, 451 U.S. 182, 189 (1981)); accord United States v. Quinones, 511 F.3d 289, 299 (2d Cir. 2007). As a general matter, \"[v]oir dire is necessarily a matter in which the trial court has extremely broad discretion,\" and \"federal trial judges are not required to ask every question that counsel—even all counsel—believes is appropriate.\" Lawes,",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005250",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Alison J. Nathan",
      "Ghislaine Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "U.S Department of Justice",
      "United States Attorney",
      "United States District Court",
      "Southern District of New York"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "October 18, 2021",
      "October 14, 2021"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "20 Cr. 330 (AJN)",
      "Dkt. No. 343",
      "Dkt. No. 341",
      "DOJ-OGR-00005250"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a formal letter from the U.S. Department of Justice to the Honorable Alison J. Nathan, regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The document is typed and contains legal citations and references to court documents."
}