mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES007/DOJ-OGR-00019714.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "2",
    "document_number": "1:20-cr-10633-DAD Document 122 Filed 12/28/20 Page 2 of 2",
    "date": "December 28, 2020",
    "document_type": "Court Order",
    "has_handwriting": true,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "none of the new information that the Defendant presented in support of her application has a material bearing on the Court's determination that she poses a flight risk.\n\nFurthermore, for substantially the same reasons as the Court determined that detention was warranted in the initial bail hearing, the Court again concludes that no conditions of release can reasonably assure the Defendant's appearance at future proceedings. In reaching that conclusion, the Court considers the nature and circumstances of the offenses charged, the weight of the evidence against the Defendant, the history and characteristics of the Defendant, and the nature and seriousness of the danger that the Defendant's release would pose. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g). The Government does not contend that the Defendant poses a danger to the community. Nonetheless the Court determines that the other three factors warrant detention under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e). The Court also finds that the Defendant's proposed bail conditions would not reasonably assure her appearance at future proceedings.\n\nAs a result, the Court concludes that the Government has met its burden of persuasion that the Defendant poses a flight risk and that pre-trial detention continues to be warranted.\n\nOn or before December 30, 2020, the parties are ORDERED to submit a joint letter indicating whether they propose any redactions and the justification for any such proposal.\n\nThis resolves Dkt No. 97.\n\nSO ORDERED.\n\nDated: December 28, 2020\nNew York, New York\n\nALISON J. NATHAN\nUnited States District Judge",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "none of the new information that the Defendant presented in support of her application has a material bearing on the Court's determination that she poses a flight risk.\n\nFurthermore, for substantially the same reasons as the Court determined that detention was warranted in the initial bail hearing, the Court again concludes that no conditions of release can reasonably assure the Defendant's appearance at future proceedings. In reaching that conclusion, the Court considers the nature and circumstances of the offenses charged, the weight of the evidence against the Defendant, the history and characteristics of the Defendant, and the nature and seriousness of the danger that the Defendant's release would pose. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g). The Government does not contend that the Defendant poses a danger to the community. Nonetheless the Court determines that the other three factors warrant detention under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e). The Court also finds that the Defendant's proposed bail conditions would not reasonably assure her appearance at future proceedings.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "As a result, the Court concludes that the Government has met its burden of persuasion that the Defendant poses a flight risk and that pre-trial detention continues to be warranted.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "On or before December 30, 2020, the parties are ORDERED to submit a joint letter indicating whether they propose any redactions and the justification for any such proposal.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "This resolves Dkt No. 97.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SO ORDERED.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Dated: December 28, 2020\nNew York, New York",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "handwritten",
      "content": "ALISON J. NATHAN",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "ALISON J. NATHAN\nUnited States District Judge",
      "position": "bottom"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "ALISON J. NATHAN",
      "Defendant"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Government"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "December 28, 2020",
      "December 30, 2020"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-10633-DAD Document 122",
      "Dkt No. 97"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document is a court order with a signature from the judge. The text is mostly printed, with the judge's signature being handwritten."
}