mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES002/DOJ-OGR-00003219.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "43",
    "document_number": "204-3",
    "date": "04/16/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204-3 Filed 04/16/21 Page 43 of 348\ncharge. Villafaña suggested meeting with the PBPD, but the case agent explained that before formally presenting the case to the FBI, the PBPD wanted to see how the State Attorney's Office decided to charge Epstein.\n1. The PBPD Presents the Matter to the FBI and the USAO\nIn May 2006, the lead Detective handling the state's investigation met with Villafaña and the FBI case agent to summarize for them the information learned during the state's investigation.18 At the time, neither Villafaña nor the case agent had heard of Epstein or had any knowledge of his background.\nAccording to Villafaña, during this meeting, the Detective expressed concern that \"pressure had been brought to bear on . . . Krischer by Epstein's attorneys,\" and he and Chief Reiter were concerned the state would charge Epstein with only a misdemeanor or not at all.19 The Detective explained that the defense had hired private investigators to trail Reiter and the Detective, had raised claims of various improprieties by the police, and, in the view of the PBPD, had orchestrated the removal of the Assistant State Attorney initially assigned to handle the matter, who was viewed as an aggressive prosecutor, by hiring a defense attorney whose relationship with the Assistant State Attorney created a conflict of interest for the prosecutor. Further, given the missing computer equipment and surveillance camera videotapes, the Detective believed Epstein may have been \"tipped off\" in advance about the search warrant.\nDuring the meeting, Villafaña reviewed the U.S. Code to see what federal charges could be brought against Epstein. She focused on 18 U.S.C. §§ 2422 (enticement of minors into prostitution or other illegal sexual activity and use of a facility of interstate or foreign commerce to persuade or induce a minor to engage in prostitution or other illegal sexual activity) and 2423 (travel for purposes of engaging in illegal sexual conduct). As they discussed these charges, the Detective told Villafaña that Epstein and his assistants had traveled out of the Palm Beach International Airport on Epstein's private airplane, and flight logs sometimes referred to passengers as \"female\" without a name or age, which the Detective suspected might be references to underage girls. However, the Detective acknowledged that he was unable to confirm that suspicion and did not have firm evidence indicating that Epstein had transported any girls interstate or internationally. Nevertheless, Villafaña believed Epstein could be prosecuted federally, in part because of his own interstate and international travel to the Southern District of Florida to abuse girls. Villafaña discussed with the Detective and the case agent the additional investigation needed to prove violations of the federal statutes she had identified. She told them that if the evidence supported it, the case could be prosecuted federally, but she assured them that opening a federal investigation would not preclude the State Attorney's Office from charging Epstein should it choose to do so.\n18 The Detective died in May 2018.\n19 In his 2009 deposition, Reiter testified that after he referred the Epstein matter to the FBI, a Town of Palm Beach official approached Reiter and criticized his referral of the investigation to the FBI, telling Reiter that the victims were not believable and \"Palm Beach solves its own problems.\"\n17\nDOJ-OGR-00003219",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204-3 Filed 04/16/21 Page 43 of 348",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "charge. Villafaña suggested meeting with the PBPD, but the case agent explained that before formally presenting the case to the FBI, the PBPD wanted to see how the State Attorney's Office decided to charge Epstein.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1. The PBPD Presents the Matter to the FBI and the USAO",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "In May 2006, the lead Detective handling the state's investigation met with Villafaña and the FBI case agent to summarize for them the information learned during the state's investigation.18 At the time, neither Villafaña nor the case agent had heard of Epstein or had any knowledge of his background.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "According to Villafaña, during this meeting, the Detective expressed concern that \"pressure had been brought to bear on . . . Krischer by Epstein's attorneys,\" and he and Chief Reiter were concerned the state would charge Epstein with only a misdemeanor or not at all.19 The Detective explained that the defense had hired private investigators to trail Reiter and the Detective, had raised claims of various improprieties by the police, and, in the view of the PBPD, had orchestrated the removal of the Assistant State Attorney initially assigned to handle the matter, who was viewed as an aggressive prosecutor, by hiring a defense attorney whose relationship with the Assistant State Attorney created a conflict of interest for the prosecutor. Further, given the missing computer equipment and surveillance camera videotapes, the Detective believed Epstein may have been \"tipped off\" in advance about the search warrant.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "During the meeting, Villafaña reviewed the U.S. Code to see what federal charges could be brought against Epstein. She focused on 18 U.S.C. §§ 2422 (enticement of minors into prostitution or other illegal sexual activity and use of a facility of interstate or foreign commerce to persuade or induce a minor to engage in prostitution or other illegal sexual activity) and 2423 (travel for purposes of engaging in illegal sexual conduct). As they discussed these charges, the Detective told Villafaña that Epstein and his assistants had traveled out of the Palm Beach International Airport on Epstein's private airplane, and flight logs sometimes referred to passengers as \"female\" without a name or age, which the Detective suspected might be references to underage girls. However, the Detective acknowledged that he was unable to confirm that suspicion and did not have firm evidence indicating that Epstein had transported any girls interstate or internationally. Nevertheless, Villafaña believed Epstein could be prosecuted federally, in part because of his own interstate and international travel to the Southern District of Florida to abuse girls. Villafaña discussed with the Detective and the case agent the additional investigation needed to prove violations of the federal statutes she had identified. She told them that if the evidence supported it, the case could be prosecuted federally, but she assured them that opening a federal investigation would not preclude the State Attorney's Office from charging Epstein should it choose to do so.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "18 The Detective died in May 2018.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "19 In his 2009 deposition, Reiter testified that after he referred the Epstein matter to the FBI, a Town of Palm Beach official approached Reiter and criticized his referral of the investigation to the FBI, telling Reiter that the victims were not believable and \"Palm Beach solves its own problems.\"",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "17",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00003219",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Villafaña",
      "Epstein",
      "Krischer",
      "Reiter",
      "Detective"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "FBI",
      "PBPD",
      "State Attorney's Office"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Palm Beach",
      "Florida",
      "Southern District of Florida"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "May 2006",
      "May 2018",
      "2009",
      "04/16/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 204-3",
      "18 U.S.C. §§ 2422",
      "18 U.S.C. §§ 2423",
      "DOJ-OGR-00003219"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the Epstein case. It is a printed document with no handwritten text or stamps. The text is clear and legible."
}