mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES002/DOJ-OGR-00005673.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "9",
    "document_number": "387",
    "date": "10/29/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 387 Filed 10/29/21 Page 9 of 21\n\nFor the reasons stated below, the Court should not admit evidence related to Accuser-3 at trial as evidence of the charged conspiracies or as \"other act\" evidence under Rule 404(b). In the alternative, the Court should preclude the government and Accuser-3 from referring to Accuser-3 as a \"minor\" or asserting that Accuser-3 was a \"minor\" at the time of the alleged sex acts. The Court should also preclude the government and Accuser-3 from representing that Epstein \"sexually abused\" her and give the jury an appropriate limiting instruction that the alleged conduct was lawful and that the sexual activity cannot be considered \"illegal\" or \"criminal\" or \"unlawful\" for the purposes of the crimes charged in the indictment.2\n\nI. Applicable Law\n\nARGUMENT\n\nRule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence governs the admissibility of evidence of \"crimes, wrongs, or acts\" other than those charged in the indictment. United States v. Curley, 639 F.3d 50, 56 (2d Cir. 2011) (quoting Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)). The rule provides, in relevant part:\n\n(1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of any other crime, wrong, or act is not admissible to prove a person's character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.\n\n(2) Permitted Uses. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.\n\nFed. R. Evid. 404(b)(1)-(2). For other act evidence to be admissible under Rule 404(b), (1) it must be offered for a proper purpose, (2) it must be relevant to a disputed issue, and (3) the probative value of the evidence cannot be substantially outweighed by its potential for unfair\n\n2 For the same reasons, Ms. Maxwell also renews her motion to strike the allegations related to Accuser-3 from the S2 Indictment.",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 387 Filed 10/29/21 Page 9 of 21",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "For the reasons stated below, the Court should not admit evidence related to Accuser-3 at trial as evidence of the charged conspiracies or as \"other act\" evidence under Rule 404(b). In the alternative, the Court should preclude the government and Accuser-3 from referring to Accuser-3 as a \"minor\" or asserting that Accuser-3 was a \"minor\" at the time of the alleged sex acts. The Court should also preclude the government and Accuser-3 from representing that Epstein \"sexually abused\" her and give the jury an appropriate limiting instruction that the alleged conduct was lawful and that the sexual activity cannot be considered \"illegal\" or \"criminal\" or \"unlawful\" for the purposes of the crimes charged in the indictment.2",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "I. Applicable Law",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "ARGUMENT",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence governs the admissibility of evidence of \"crimes, wrongs, or acts\" other than those charged in the indictment. United States v. Curley, 639 F.3d 50, 56 (2d Cir. 2011) (quoting Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)). The rule provides, in relevant part:",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "(1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of any other crime, wrong, or act is not admissible to prove a person's character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "(2) Permitted Uses. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(1)-(2). For other act evidence to be admissible under Rule 404(b), (1) it must be offered for a proper purpose, (2) it must be relevant to a disputed issue, and (3) the probative value of the evidence cannot be substantially outweighed by its potential for unfair",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2 For the same reasons, Ms. Maxwell also renews her motion to strike the allegations related to Accuser-3 from the S2 Indictment.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "5",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005673",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Epstein",
      "Accuser-3",
      "Ms. Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "10/29/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 387",
      "639 F.3d 50",
      "S2 Indictment",
      "DOJ-OGR-00005673"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case involving Ghislaine Maxwell. The text discusses the admissibility of evidence under Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence."
}