mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00010465.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "19",
    "document_number": "663",
    "date": "06/15/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 663 Filed 06/15/22 Page 19 of 77\n\nsignificantly below the sentence recommended by the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and below the sentence recommended by Probation.\n\nMs. Maxwell is Not a Danger to the Community\n\nMs. Maxwell poses no threat to the public and there is no risk that she will reoffend upon her release from custody. The government has never argued, in connection with Ms. Maxwell's bail applications or otherwise, that Ms. Maxwell is a danger to the community; nor could they. Apart from the conduct at issue in this case, which occurred almost 20 to 30 years ago, Ms. Maxwell has never once been accused of a crime, much less sexual abuse of minors. In fact, after leaving Epstein, Ms. Maxwell was involved in committed, long-term relationships with two men, both of whom had young children who continue to support her. Ms. Maxwell is not a dangerous criminal or a habitual offender. She is someone who wants nothing more than to live a normal family life - something she was denied because of her association with Epstein and will now almost certainly never have. The public does not need to be protected from Ms. Maxwell and such considerations should have no weight in determining her sentence.\n\nA Guidelines Sentence is Not Necessary to Achieve Specific or General Deterrence\n\nA guidelines sentence for Ms. Maxwell would not serve the sentencing goals of either specific or general deterrence. A significant sentence is not necessary to achieve the goal of individual deterrence here. This is Ms. Maxwell's only brush with the law. Ms. Maxwell has already learned a painful lesson from her arrest and prosecution, has lost her marriage and her stepchildren, and has been harshly punished during pre-sentence incarceration. Ms. Maxwell has already shown that she will not reoffend and does not need to be further deterred from committing crimes in the future.\n\n18\nDOJ-OGR-00010465",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 663 Filed 06/15/22 Page 19 of 77",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "significantly below the sentence recommended by the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and below the sentence recommended by Probation.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Ms. Maxwell is Not a Danger to the Community",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Ms. Maxwell poses no threat to the public and there is no risk that she will reoffend upon her release from custody. The government has never argued, in connection with Ms. Maxwell's bail applications or otherwise, that Ms. Maxwell is a danger to the community; nor could they. Apart from the conduct at issue in this case, which occurred almost 20 to 30 years ago, Ms. Maxwell has never once been accused of a crime, much less sexual abuse of minors. In fact, after leaving Epstein, Ms. Maxwell was involved in committed, long-term relationships with two men, both of whom had young children who continue to support her. Ms. Maxwell is not a dangerous criminal or a habitual offender. She is someone who wants nothing more than to live a normal family life - something she was denied because of her association with Epstein and will now almost certainly never have. The public does not need to be protected from Ms. Maxwell and such considerations should have no weight in determining her sentence.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A Guidelines Sentence is Not Necessary to Achieve Specific or General Deterrence",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A guidelines sentence for Ms. Maxwell would not serve the sentencing goals of either specific or general deterrence. A significant sentence is not necessary to achieve the goal of individual deterrence here. This is Ms. Maxwell's only brush with the law. Ms. Maxwell has already learned a painful lesson from her arrest and prosecution, has lost her marriage and her stepchildren, and has been harshly punished during pre-sentence incarceration. Ms. Maxwell has already shown that she will not reoffend and does not need to be further deterred from committing crimes in the future.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "18",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00010465",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Maxwell",
      "Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Probation"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "06/15/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 663",
      "DOJ-OGR-00010465"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the sentencing of Ms. Maxwell. The text argues that Ms. Maxwell is not a danger to the community and that a guidelines sentence is not necessary to achieve specific or general deterrence."
}