mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00010596.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "5",
    "document_number": "672",
    "date": "06/24/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 672 Filed 06/24/22 Page 5 of 68 LAW OFFICES OF BOBBI C. STERNHEIM allocution at sentencing Id. §3771(a)(4), (e). The definition of “victim” in the CVRA does not mirror the various definitions of “victim” in the guidelines. Cf. United States v. Blake, 81 F.3d 498, 506 n.5 (4th Cir. 1996) (“The definition of victim provided in [the statute] is much narrower than the one in the guidelines.”) Therefore, the terms should not be conflated. It cannot be assumed that “relevant conduct” for guidelines purposes is the same as “related conduct” for purposes of determining statutory victim status under a scheme or conspiracy-based offense. Nor does the term “victim,” as variously appearing in the guidelines, inform the determination of statutory victim status under the CVRA. Ms. Maxwell’s Due Process Rights Must Be Safeguarded The CVRA affords victims the right of confrontation against their alleged abusers. The Act does not provide a reciprocal right to a defendant, whose due process rights rest in the opportunity to cross-examine an alleged victim during trial. Of the four accusers who testified at trial, only two – Annie Farmer and “Kate”- have submitted victim impact statements. To the extent permitted by the Court’s rulings, the defense had the opportunity to challenge their allegations and credibility during the trial. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 412, the Court precluded the defense from raising certain issues during trial. Both Annie Farmer and “Kate” raise issues in their written statements that were not disclosed by the government or revealed during their testimony and should not be permitted to be aired during sentencing . To the extent such portions of their statements are redacted, we will not press objection for CVRA victims. Virginia Giuffre was mentioned during trial but was not called as a government witness. Her credibility remains in issue.2 By letters to the government, counsel for Alan Dershowitz have cautioned the 2 Absent from Ms. Giuffre’s statement is any mention of her abuse by a 65-year-old sex trafficker, Ron Eppinger, pre-dating her meeting Epstein and Ms. Maxwell, which she recounted in her memoir - 5 DOJ-OGR-00010596",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 672 Filed 06/24/22 Page 5 of 68 LAW OFFICES OF BOBBI C. STERNHEIM",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "allocution at sentencing Id. §3771(a)(4), (e). The definition of “victim” in the CVRA does not mirror the various definitions of “victim” in the guidelines. Cf. United States v. Blake, 81 F.3d 498, 506 n.5 (4th Cir. 1996) (“The definition of victim provided in [the statute] is much narrower than the one in the guidelines.”) Therefore, the terms should not be conflated. It cannot be assumed that “relevant conduct” for guidelines purposes is the same as “related conduct” for purposes of determining statutory victim status under a scheme or conspiracy-based offense. Nor does the term “victim,” as variously appearing in the guidelines, inform the determination of statutory victim status under the CVRA.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Ms. Maxwell’s Due Process Rights Must Be Safeguarded",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The CVRA affords victims the right of confrontation against their alleged abusers. The Act does not provide a reciprocal right to a defendant, whose due process rights rest in the opportunity to cross-examine an alleged victim during trial. Of the four accusers who testified at trial, only two – Annie Farmer and “Kate”- have submitted victim impact statements. To the extent permitted by the Court’s rulings, the defense had the opportunity to challenge their allegations and credibility during the trial. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 412, the Court precluded the defense from raising certain issues during trial. Both Annie Farmer and “Kate” raise issues in their written statements that were not disclosed by the government or revealed during their testimony and should not be permitted to be aired during sentencing . To the extent such portions of their statements are redacted, we will not press objection for CVRA victims. Virginia Giuffre was mentioned during trial but was not called as a government witness. Her credibility remains in issue.2 By letters to the government, counsel for Alan Dershowitz have cautioned the",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2 Absent from Ms. Giuffre’s statement is any mention of her abuse by a 65-year-old sex trafficker, Ron Eppinger, pre-dating her meeting Epstein and Ms. Maxwell, which she recounted in her memoir -",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "5 DOJ-OGR-00010596",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Annie Farmer",
      "Kate",
      "Virginia Giuffre",
      "Alan Dershowitz",
      "Ron Eppinger",
      "Epstein",
      "Ms. Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "LAW OFFICES OF BOBBI C. STERNHEIM"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "06/24/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "672",
      "DOJ-OGR-00010596"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell. The text discusses the definition of 'victim' in the CVRA and its implications for the case. The document includes references to specific individuals and events, as well as legal citations and rules of evidence. There are no visible stamps or handwritten annotations on the page."
}