mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES002/DOJ-OGR-00002936.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "2",
    "document_number": "204",
    "date": "04/16/21",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 Filed 04/16/21 Page 2 of 239\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nPRELIMINARY STATEMENT ............................................................................................ 1\n\nBACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 2\n\nARGUMENT ........................................................................................................................... 3\n\nI. Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement Is Irrelevant to This Case ....................... 3\nA. The NPA Does Not Bind the Southern District of New York.................................... 4\n1. The Text of the Agreement Does Not Contain a Promise to Bind Other Districts ........ 5\n2. The Defendant Has Offered No Evidence That the NPA Binds Other Districts............... 9\nB. The NPA Does Not Immunize Maxwell from Prosecution ......................................... 15\n1. The NPA Is Limited to Particular Crimes Between 2001 and 2007 .............................. 15\n2. The NPA Does Not Confer Enforceable Rights on Maxwell....................................... 17\nC. The Defendant Has Offered No Basis for Additional Discovery or a Hearing ............ 21\n\nII. The Indictment Is Timely ................................................................................................ 23\nA. Statutory Background ................................................................................................ 24\nB. The 2003 Amendment to Section 3283 Applies Retroactively ................................... 26\n1. The 2003 Amendment Satisfies Step One of Landgraf................................................. 28\n2. The 2003 Amendment Satisfies Step Two of Landgraf................................................ 32\nC. The Defendant's Crimes Involved the Sexual Abuse of Minors .................................. 36\n\nIII. The Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Indictment Based on Alleged Improper Pre-\nTrial Delay Should Be Denied.............................................................................................. 41\nA. The Defendant Has Failed to Demonstrate Actual and Substantial Prejudice............... 42\n1. Applicable Law.......................................................................................................... 42\n2. Discussion.................................................................................................................. 44\nB. The Defendant Has Failed to Establish That the Government Delayed the Indictment for\nAn Improper Purpose...................................................................................................... 52\n1. Applicable Law.......................................................................................................... 52\n2. Discussion.................................................................................................................. 54\n\nIV. The Court Should Deny the Defendant's Motions to Suppress........................................ 59\nA. Factual Background ................................................................................................... 61\n1. The Civil Lawsuit against Maxwell............................................................................. 61\n2. February 2016 Meeting ............................................................................................... 62\n3. The April and July 2016 Depositions of Maxwell ........................................................ 64\n4. The USAO-SDNY Commences the Instant Investigation in 2018 ................................ 65\n5. The USAO-SDNY's Subpoenas and Ex Parte Applications for Materials...................... 66\n6. Proceedings before Chief Judge McMahon................................................................. 68\na. March 26, 2019 Hearing........................................................................................... 68\nb. April 9, 2019 Hearing............................................................................................... 70\ni\nDOJ-OGR-00002936",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 Filed 04/16/21 Page 2 of 239",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "TABLE OF CONTENTS",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ............................................................................................ 1\n\nBACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 2\n\nARGUMENT ........................................................................................................................... 3\n\nI. Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement Is Irrelevant to This Case ....................... 3\nA. The NPA Does Not Bind the Southern District of New York.................................... 4\n1. The Text of the Agreement Does Not Contain a Promise to Bind Other Districts ........ 5\n2. The Defendant Has Offered No Evidence That the NPA Binds Other Districts............... 9\nB. The NPA Does Not Immunize Maxwell from Prosecution ......................................... 15\n1. The NPA Is Limited to Particular Crimes Between 2001 and 2007 .............................. 15\n2. The NPA Does Not Confer Enforceable Rights on Maxwell....................................... 17\nC. The Defendant Has Offered No Basis for Additional Discovery or a Hearing ............ 21\n\nII. The Indictment Is Timely ................................................................................................ 23\nA. Statutory Background ................................................................................................ 24\nB. The 2003 Amendment to Section 3283 Applies Retroactively ................................... 26\n1. The 2003 Amendment Satisfies Step One of Landgraf................................................. 28\n2. The 2003 Amendment Satisfies Step Two of Landgraf................................................ 32\nC. The Defendant's Crimes Involved the Sexual Abuse of Minors .................................. 36\n\nIII. The Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Indictment Based on Alleged Improper Pre-\nTrial Delay Should Be Denied.............................................................................................. 41\nA. The Defendant Has Failed to Demonstrate Actual and Substantial Prejudice............... 42\n1. Applicable Law.......................................................................................................... 42\n2. Discussion.................................................................................................................. 44\nB. The Defendant Has Failed to Establish That the Government Delayed the Indictment for\nAn Improper Purpose...................................................................................................... 52\n1. Applicable Law.......................................................................................................... 52\n2. Discussion.................................................................................................................. 54\n\nIV. The Court Should Deny the Defendant's Motions to Suppress........................................ 59\nA. Factual Background ................................................................................................... 61\n1. The Civil Lawsuit against Maxwell............................................................................. 61\n2. February 2016 Meeting ............................................................................................... 62\n3. The April and July 2016 Depositions of Maxwell ........................................................ 64\n4. The USAO-SDNY Commences the Instant Investigation in 2018 ................................ 65\n5. The USAO-SDNY's Subpoenas and Ex Parte Applications for Materials...................... 66\n6. Proceedings before Chief Judge McMahon................................................................. 68\na. March 26, 2019 Hearing........................................................................................... 68\nb. April 9, 2019 Hearing............................................................................................... 70\ni",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00002936",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jeffrey Epstein",
      "Maxwell",
      "McMahon"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "USAO-SDNY"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Southern District of New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "2001",
      "2007",
      "2003",
      "2016",
      "2018",
      "2019",
      "04/16/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 204",
      "DOJ-OGR-00002936"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case against Maxwell, with a table of contents outlining various arguments and sections. The text is printed and legible, with no visible handwriting or stamps."
}