mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES001/DOJ-OGR-00002686.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "11",
    "document_number": "146",
    "date": "02/04/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 146 Filed 02/04/21 Page 11 of 16\n\ninvolving the sexual or physical abuse of a child under the age of 18 years\" could be brought until the victim reached age 25. 18 U.S.C. § 3283 (1994). While Congress amended the statute in 2003 to extend the time in which a prosecution could be brought to within the life of the victim, 18 U.S.C. § 3283 (2003), Accuser-3 reached the age of 25 in , and thus the statute of limitations as to her had expired before the time of the amendment. While Ms. Maxwell contends that § 3283 cannot be applied retroactively at all, and is inapplicable in any event,5 it is black-letter law that retroactive application of a criminal statute of limitations to revive a time-barred claim would violate the Ex Post Facto Clause. Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607, 618 (2003). Thus, there can be no prosecution for any conduct alleged as to Accuser-3.\n\nB. The Allegations Regarding Accuser-3 Are Irrelevant to the Alleged Conspiracies.\n\nAccording to the indictment, the object of the alleged conspiracies was to entice or cause one or more individuals to travel in interstate or foreign commerce in order to engage in unlawful sexual activity. Because, as shown above, the allegations in the indictment are insufficient to allege such a conspiracy as to Accuser-3, the only individuals as to whom the indictment even arguably alleges such a conspiracy are Accuser-1 and Accuser-2. The allegations regarding Accuser-3, however, have nothing to do with any conspiracy as to Accuser-1 or Accuser-2.\n\nWhile the government couches the allegations regarding Minor Victim-3 as \"overt acts\" in furtherance of the conspiracies alleged in Counts One and Three, they are not. The \"scope of the conspiratorial agreement\" is the key to determining whether \"an overt act may properly be regarded as in furtherance of the conspiracy.\" United States v. Benussi, 216 F. Supp. 2d 299, 311 (S.D.N.Y. 2002), aff'd sub nom. United States v. Salmonese, 352 F.3d 608 (2d Cir. 2003)\n\n5 See Motion to Dismiss Counts One Through Four of the Indictment as Time-Barred.\n\n7\nDOJ-OGR-00002686",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 146 Filed 02/04/21 Page 11 of 16",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "involving the sexual or physical abuse of a child under the age of 18 years\" could be brought until the victim reached age 25. 18 U.S.C. § 3283 (1994). While Congress amended the statute in 2003 to extend the time in which a prosecution could be brought to within the life of the victim, 18 U.S.C. § 3283 (2003), Accuser-3 reached the age of 25 in , and thus the statute of limitations as to her had expired before the time of the amendment. While Ms. Maxwell contends that § 3283 cannot be applied retroactively at all, and is inapplicable in any event,5 it is black-letter law that retroactive application of a criminal statute of limitations to revive a time-barred claim would violate the Ex Post Facto Clause. Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607, 618 (2003). Thus, there can be no prosecution for any conduct alleged as to Accuser-3.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "B. The Allegations Regarding Accuser-3 Are Irrelevant to the Alleged Conspiracies.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "According to the indictment, the object of the alleged conspiracies was to entice or cause one or more individuals to travel in interstate or foreign commerce in order to engage in unlawful sexual activity. Because, as shown above, the allegations in the indictment are insufficient to allege such a conspiracy as to Accuser-3, the only individuals as to whom the indictment even arguably alleges such a conspiracy are Accuser-1 and Accuser-2. The allegations regarding Accuser-3, however, have nothing to do with any conspiracy as to Accuser-1 or Accuser-2.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "While the government couches the allegations regarding Minor Victim-3 as \"overt acts\" in furtherance of the conspiracies alleged in Counts One and Three, they are not. The \"scope of the conspiratorial agreement\" is the key to determining whether \"an overt act may properly be regarded as in furtherance of the conspiracy.\" United States v. Benussi, 216 F. Supp. 2d 299, 311 (S.D.N.Y. 2002), aff'd sub nom. United States v. Salmonese, 352 F.3d 608 (2d Cir. 2003)",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "5 See Motion to Dismiss Counts One Through Four of the Indictment as Time-Barred.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "7",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00002686",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Maxwell",
      "Accuser-1",
      "Accuser-2",
      "Accuser-3",
      "Minor Victim-3"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [
      "California",
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "2003",
      "02/04/21",
      "1994",
      "2002"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "Document 146",
      "18 U.S.C. § 3283",
      "539 U.S. 607",
      "216 F. Supp. 2d 299",
      "352 F.3d 608",
      "DOJ-OGR-00002686"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case. The text is mostly printed, with no handwritten content. There are no visible stamps or signatures. The document is well-formatted and legible."
}