mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES008/DOJ-OGR-00021143.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "96",
    "document_number": "59",
    "date": "02/28/2023",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 22-1426, Document 59, 02/28/2023, 3475902, Page96 of 113\n\nC. The Variance Between the Proof at Trial and the Allegations in the Indictment Substantially Prejudiced Maxwell.\n\nIn the alternative, the Court must vacate Maxwell's convictions on Counts Three and Four because the record demonstrates a variance between the proof at trial and the allegations in the Indictment that substantially prejudiced Maxwell as elaborated above.\n\nHere, the Mann Act counts did not contain any allegations concerning Jane's sexual abuse in New Mexico. Indeed, although Jane had previously told the FBI about the trip to New Mexico, she had denied being sexually abused there. It was not until just before trial, that Jane claimed for the first time that she had engaged in sexual activity with Epstein while she was at the ranch.\n\nFor the foregoing reasons, Maxwell's convictions on Counts Three and Four were based on a constructive amendment to the charged offenses. The Court must vacate these convictions and grant a new trial on these counts.\n\n81\nDOJ-OGR-00021143",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 22-1426, Document 59, 02/28/2023, 3475902, Page96 of 113",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C. The Variance Between the Proof at Trial and the Allegations in the Indictment Substantially Prejudiced Maxwell.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "In the alternative, the Court must vacate Maxwell's convictions on Counts Three and Four because the record demonstrates a variance between the proof at trial and the allegations in the Indictment that substantially prejudiced Maxwell as elaborated above.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Here, the Mann Act counts did not contain any allegations concerning Jane's sexual abuse in New Mexico. Indeed, although Jane had previously told the FBI about the trip to New Mexico, she had denied being sexually abused there. It was not until just before trial, that Jane claimed for the first time that she had engaged in sexual activity with Epstein while she was at the ranch.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "For the foregoing reasons, Maxwell's convictions on Counts Three and Four were based on a constructive amendment to the charged offenses. The Court must vacate these convictions and grant a new trial on these counts.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "81",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00021143",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Maxwell",
      "Jane",
      "Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "FBI",
      "Court"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New Mexico"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "02/28/2023"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "22-1426",
      "59",
      "3475902",
      "DOJ-OGR-00021143"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case against Maxwell. The text is printed and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes. The document is well-formatted and legible."
}