mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES001/DOJ-OGR-00000930.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "20",
    "document_number": "20-1",
    "date": "04/01/2021",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "the files around into a different order. She is stuck looking at one page at a time over a screen three feet away without a lawyer in the same room. These are textbook untenable conditions. Stephens, 447 F. Supp. 3d at 67 (explaining the importance of legal visits and ordering bail during pandemic); Weigand, 2020 WL 5887602, at *2 (ordering bail during pandemic because defendant needed ability to review the discovery in complex, document-heavy case). This is no way to prepare for a trial where the government will be asking for a sentence that will imprison her for the rest of her life. Ex.A\n\nThis Court has recognized that, after a relatively short time, pretrial detention turns into prohibited, unconstitutional punishment. United States v. Jackson, 823 F.2d 4, 7 (2d Cir. 1987) (“grave due process concerns” are implicated by a seven-month period of pretrial detention); United States v. Melendez-Carrions, 790 F.2d 984, 1008 (2d Cir. 1986) (Feinberg, J. concurring) (“[G]eneral requirements of due process compel us to draw the line [of permissible pretrial detention] well short of [] eight months.”). Under the current conditions, it can hardly be disputed that Ms. Maxwell is being punished, which in itself",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "the files around into a different order. She is stuck looking at one page at a time over a screen three feet away without a lawyer in the same room. These are textbook untenable conditions. Stephens, 447 F. Supp. 3d at 67 (explaining the importance of legal visits and ordering bail during pandemic); Weigand, 2020 WL 5887602, at *2 (ordering bail during pandemic because defendant needed ability to review the discovery in complex, document-heavy case). This is no way to prepare for a trial where the government will be asking for a sentence that will imprison her for the rest of her life. Ex.A",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "This Court has recognized that, after a relatively short time, pretrial detention turns into prohibited, unconstitutional punishment. United States v. Jackson, 823 F.2d 4, 7 (2d Cir. 1987) (“grave due process concerns” are implicated by a seven-month period of pretrial detention); United States v. Melendez-Carrions, 790 F.2d 984, 1008 (2d Cir. 1986) (Feinberg, J. concurring) (“[G]eneral requirements of due process compel us to draw the line [of permissible pretrial detention] well short of [] eight months.”). Under the current conditions, it can hardly be disputed that Ms. Maxwell is being punished, which in itself",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "18",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 21-770, Document 20-1, 04/01/2021, 3068530, Page20 of 31",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00000930",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Maxwell",
      "Feinberg",
      "Jackson",
      "Melendez-Carrions",
      "Stephens",
      "Weigand"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "United States"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "04/01/2021",
      "1986",
      "1987"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "21-770",
      "20-1",
      "3068530",
      "447 F. Supp. 3d",
      "2020 WL 5887602",
      "823 F.2d 4",
      "790 F.2d 984",
      "DOJ-OGR-00000930"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell, discussing the conditions of her pretrial detention and citing relevant case law. The text is printed, with no handwritten annotations or stamps visible."
}