mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00010434.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "17",
    "document_number": "662",
    "date": "06/15/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 662 Filed 06/15/22 Page 17 of 29\n\nThe case law bears this out. The adjustment is typically applied to defendants (virtually all of whom are male) who repeatedly and often violently sexually abuse or exploit children for their own sexual gratification and who are caught soon after or while still engaging in that behavior. See, e.g., Broxmeyer, 699 F.3d at 284-88; United States v. Suarez, No. 21-1721, 2022 WL 1449174, at *1-*2 (3d Cir. May 9, 2022); United States v. Santos, No. 21-10381, 2022 WL 1196761, at *1-*3 (5th Cir. Apr. 22, 2022); United States v. Sanchez, 30 F.4th 1063, 1067-76 (11th Cir. 2022); United States v. McGrain, No. 6:20-cr-06113 (EAW), 2022 WL 287350, at *1-*6 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 1, 2022).\n\nIn sharp contrast, Ms. Maxwell has never been accused of any sex offenses—or any crimes, for that matter—in the almost 20-year period since the conduct at issue in this case ended. There is absolutely no evidence that Ms. Maxwell is attracted to minors or has the sort of uncontrollable impulses that would compel her to re-offend. According to the trial record, it was Epstein who had such proclivities, whereas Ms. Maxwell’s role was to facilitate Epstein’s sexual abuse. Indeed, after she moved on from Epstein in the early 2000s, Ms. Maxwell was involved in two long-term relationships with men who had young children and was actively involved in their lives without even the slightest hint of impropriety. Most importantly, the government concedes that Ms. Maxwell is not a danger to the community. The government never made that assertion in connection with Ms. Maxwell’s numerous bail applications and there is no evidence whatsoever to support such a claim. Put simply, Ms. Maxwell is not “dangerous” and there is no risk that Ms. Maxwell will ever “repeat” the offense. Accordingly, there is no basis to apply § 4B1.5, which is meant to apply only to “Repeat and Dangerous” sex offenders.\n\nThe government asserts that § 4B1.5 should apply as long as the offense conduct fits within the text of the guideline, to which it claims to be faithfully adhering. See PSR at 60. It is\n\n13\nDOJ-OGR-00010434",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 662 Filed 06/15/22 Page 17 of 29",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The case law bears this out. The adjustment is typically applied to defendants (virtually all of whom are male) who repeatedly and often violently sexually abuse or exploit children for their own sexual gratification and who are caught soon after or while still engaging in that behavior. See, e.g., Broxmeyer, 699 F.3d at 284-88; United States v. Suarez, No. 21-1721, 2022 WL 1449174, at *1-*2 (3d Cir. May 9, 2022); United States v. Santos, No. 21-10381, 2022 WL 1196761, at *1-*3 (5th Cir. Apr. 22, 2022); United States v. Sanchez, 30 F.4th 1063, 1067-76 (11th Cir. 2022); United States v. McGrain, No. 6:20-cr-06113 (EAW), 2022 WL 287350, at *1-*6 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 1, 2022).",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "In sharp contrast, Ms. Maxwell has never been accused of any sex offenses—or any crimes, for that matter—in the almost 20-year period since the conduct at issue in this case ended. There is absolutely no evidence that Ms. Maxwell is attracted to minors or has the sort of uncontrollable impulses that would compel her to re-offend. According to the trial record, it was Epstein who had such proclivities, whereas Ms. Maxwell’s role was to facilitate Epstein’s sexual abuse. Indeed, after she moved on from Epstein in the early 2000s, Ms. Maxwell was involved in two long-term relationships with men who had young children and was actively involved in their lives without even the slightest hint of impropriety. Most importantly, the government concedes that Ms. Maxwell is not a danger to the community. The government never made that assertion in connection with Ms. Maxwell’s numerous bail applications and there is no evidence whatsoever to support such a claim. Put simply, Ms. Maxwell is not “dangerous” and there is no risk that Ms. Maxwell will ever “repeat” the offense. Accordingly, there is no basis to apply § 4B1.5, which is meant to apply only to “Repeat and Dangerous” sex offenders.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The government asserts that § 4B1.5 should apply as long as the offense conduct fits within the text of the guideline, to which it claims to be faithfully adhering. See PSR at 60. It is",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "13",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00010434",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Maxwell",
      "Epstein",
      "Broxmeyer",
      "Suarez",
      "Santos",
      "Sanchez",
      "McGrain"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "United States"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "3d Cir.",
      "5th Cir.",
      "11th Cir.",
      "W.D.N.Y."
    ],
    "dates": [
      "May 9, 2022",
      "Apr. 22, 2022",
      "Feb. 1, 2022",
      "06/15/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 662",
      "No. 21-1721",
      "No. 21-10381",
      "No. 6:20-cr-06113 (EAW)",
      "§ 4B1.5",
      "PSR at 60",
      "DOJ-OGR-00010434"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell, discussing her bail application and the government's assertions regarding her danger to the community. The text is well-formatted and legible, with no visible redactions or damage."
}