github-mirrors
/
mirror-epstein-docs


			
				
					
						
						
							123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384
							{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "254",
    "document_number": "77",
    "date": "06/29/2023",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 22-1426, Document 77, 06/29/2023, 3536038, Page254 of 258\nSA-252\nCase 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 204-3 Filed 04/16/21 Page 252 of 348\n\nfor him, as U.S. Attorney, to attend witness interviews, and further, that no one in the USAO \"was questioning the pain or the suffering of the victims.\" Sloman told OPR that he himself had \"never gone to a line assistant's victim or witness interview.\"\n\nVillafaña told OPR that although three of the victims interviewed during this period had been notified by the FBI in October 2007 about the resolution of the case, at this point Villafaña did not specifically tell these victims that \"there was a signed non-prosecution agreement that had these terms.\" Villafaña also told OPR she \"didn't talk about money\" because she \"didn't want there to be an allegation at the time of trial . . . that [the victims] were either exaggerating their claims or completely making up claims in order to increase their damages amount.\" Rather, according to Villafaña, she told the three victims that \"an agreement had been reached where [Epstein] was going to be entering a guilty plea, but it doesn't look like he intends to actually perform . . . [and] now it looks like this may have to be charged, and may have to go to trial.\" Villafaña recalled \"explaining that the case was under investigation,\" that they \"were preparing the case [for charging] again,\" and \"expressing our hope that charges would be brought.\" Villafaña recalled one victim \"making a comment about the amount of [imprisonment] time and why was it so low\" and Villafaña answered, \"that was the agreement that the office had reached.\"\n\nWith regard to the victims Villafaña interviewed who had not received an FBI notification in October 2007, Villafaña recalled discussing one victim's safety concerns but not whether they discussed the agreement. She recalled telling another victim that \"we thought we had reached an agreement with [Epstein] and then we didn't,\" but was \"pretty sure\" that she did not mention the agreement during the interview of the third victim. Villafaña explained that she likely did not discuss the agreement because at that point I just felt . . . like it was nonexistent. [The victim] didn't know anything about it beforehand, and as far as I could tell it was going to end up being thrown on the heap, and I didn't want to -- . . . if you tell people, oh, look, he's already admitted that he's guilty, like, I didn't want that to color her statement. I just wanted to get the facts of the case.\n\nThe CEOS Trial Attorney told OPR that she did not recall any discussion with the victims about the NPA or the status of the case.340 She did remember explaining the significance of the prosecution to one victim who \"did not think anything should happen\" to Epstein. The FBI case agent told OPR that she did not recall the January 2008 interviews. OPR located notes to an FBI interview report, stating that one of the victims wanted another victim to be prosecuted. Attorneys for the two victims other than Wild who had been notified by the FBI in October 2007 about the resolution of the case informed OPR that as of 2020, their clients had no memory of meeting with authored concerning one of the two victims that contained no information regarding a discussion of the status of the investigation or the resolution of the case. Through her attorney, this victim told OPR that she did not recall having contact with anyone from the USAO.\n339 Villafaña did not recall any other specific questions from victims.\n340 The CEOS Trial Attorney noted that CEOS did not issue victim notifications; rather, such notifications were generally handled by a Victim Witness Specialist in the assigned USAO.\n\n226\nDOJ-OGR-00021426",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 22-1426, Document 77, 06/29/2023, 3536038, Page254 of 258",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SA-252",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 204-3 Filed 04/16/21 Page 252 of 348",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "for him, as U.S. Attorney, to attend witness interviews, and further, that no one in the USAO \"was questioning the pain or the suffering of the victims.\" Sloman told OPR that he himself had \"never gone to a line assistant's victim or witness interview.\"\n\nVillafaña told OPR that although three of the victims interviewed during this period had been notified by the FBI in October 2007 about the resolution of the case, at this point Villafaña did not specifically tell these victims that \"there was a signed non-prosecution agreement that had these terms.\" Villafaña also told OPR she \"didn't talk about money\" because she \"didn't want there to be an allegation at the time of trial . . . that [the victims] were either exaggerating their claims or completely making up claims in order to increase their damages amount.\" Rather, according to Villafaña, she told the three victims that \"an agreement had been reached where [Epstein] was going to be entering a guilty plea, but it doesn't look like he intends to actually perform . . . [and] now it looks like this may have to be charged, and may have to go to trial.\" Villafaña recalled \"explaining that the case was under investigation,\" that they \"were preparing the case [for charging] again,\" and \"expressing our hope that charges would be brought.\" Villafaña recalled one victim \"making a comment about the amount of [imprisonment] time and why was it so low\" and Villafaña answered, \"that was the agreement that the office had reached.\"\n\nWith regard to the victims Villafaña interviewed who had not received an FBI notification in October 2007, Villafaña recalled discussing one victim's safety concerns but not whether they discussed the agreement. She recalled telling another victim that \"we thought we had reached an agreement with [Epstein] and then we didn't,\" but was \"pretty sure\" that she did not mention the agreement during the interview of the third victim. Villafaña explained that she likely did not discuss the agreement because at that point I just felt . . . like it was nonexistent. [The victim] didn't know anything about it beforehand, and as far as I could tell it was going to end up being thrown on the heap, and I didn't want to -- . . . if you tell people, oh, look, he's already admitted that he's guilty, like, I didn't want that to color her statement. I just wanted to get the facts of the case.\n\nThe CEOS Trial Attorney told OPR that she did not recall any discussion with the victims about the NPA or the status of the case.340 She did remember explaining the significance of the prosecution to one victim who \"did not think anything should happen\" to Epstein. The FBI case agent told OPR that she did not recall the January 2008 interviews. OPR located notes to an FBI interview report, stating that one of the victims wanted another victim to be prosecuted. Attorneys for the two victims other than Wild who had been notified by the FBI in October 2007 about the resolution of the case informed OPR that as of 2020, their clients had no memory of meeting with authored concerning one of the two victims that contained no information regarding a discussion of the status of the investigation or the resolution of the case. Through her attorney, this victim told OPR that she did not recall having contact with anyone from the USAO.",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "339 Villafaña did not recall any other specific questions from victims.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "340 The CEOS Trial Attorney noted that CEOS did not issue victim notifications; rather, such notifications were generally handled by a Victim Witness Specialist in the assigned USAO.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "226",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00021426",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Villafaña",
      "Sloman",
      "Epstein",
      "Wild"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "FBI",
      "USAO",
      "OPR",
      "CEOS"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "06/29/2023",
      "04/16/21",
      "October 2007",
      "January 2008",
      "2020"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 22-1426",
      "Document 77",
      "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "Document 204-3",
      "3536038",
      "DOJ-OGR-00021426"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court document related to the Epstein case. It contains details about the interactions between victims, attorneys, and law enforcement officials. The text is mostly printed, with some footnotes and a page number at the bottom."
}