mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00008942.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "18 of 37",
    "document_number": "600",
    "date": "02/11/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 600 Filed 02/11/22 Page 18 of 37\nwas travel \"from Florida to New York, New York,\" despite the defense's request to include that language. Dkt. 410-1 at 19; Tr. 2758:23-2760:9.\nThe evidence at trial concerning Count Four rested exclusively on the testimony of Jane and evidence that corroborated her testimony. Jane testified primarily about being sexually abused by Epstein in Epstein's house in Palm Beach. Tr. 298:16-315:19. Jane also testified that she traveled several times with Epstein and Ms. Maxwell when she was 14, 15 and 16 and was sexually abused in Epstein's residences in New York and New Mexico. Tr. 316:2-324:20. As most of these trips were to New York, the majority of Jane's testimony about the trips consisted of a description of Epstein's house in New York and the sexual abuse she experienced there. Tr. 317:2-321:5. But Jane did recall one trip to New Mexico when she was \"15 or 16.\" Tr. 321:6-321:13. Jane testified that she flew to New Mexico with Epstein and Ms. Maxwell and stayed at Epstein's ranch. Tr. 321:14-322:6. She further testified that, at some point while she was there, someone came to her room and escorted her to Epstein's room where she was sexually abused. Tr. 322:7-323:19.\nBased on this testimony and the text of the Jury Note, there is a substantial likelihood that the jury did not convict Ms. Maxwell based on Jane's testimony about the New York trips, and instead improperly based their conviction solely on the sexual abuse that Jane experienced in New Mexico. According to the Jury Note, the jurors had the mistaken impression that it would be sufficient to satisfy the second element of Count Four if they found that Ms. Maxwell had intended Jane to engage in sexual activity in New Mexico, even though such conduct was not and could not have been \"sexual activity in violation of New York Penal Law, Section 130.55\":\nUnder Count Four (4), if the defendant aided in the transportation of Jane's return flight, but not the flight to New Mexico where/if the intent was for Jane to engage in sexual activity, can she be found guilty under the second element?\n13\nDOJ-OGR-00008942",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 600 Filed 02/11/22 Page 18 of 37",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "was travel \"from Florida to New York, New York,\" despite the defense's request to include that language. Dkt. 410-1 at 19; Tr. 2758:23-2760:9.\nThe evidence at trial concerning Count Four rested exclusively on the testimony of Jane and evidence that corroborated her testimony. Jane testified primarily about being sexually abused by Epstein in Epstein's house in Palm Beach. Tr. 298:16-315:19. Jane also testified that she traveled several times with Epstein and Ms. Maxwell when she was 14, 15 and 16 and was sexually abused in Epstein's residences in New York and New Mexico. Tr. 316:2-324:20. As most of these trips were to New York, the majority of Jane's testimony about the trips consisted of a description of Epstein's house in New York and the sexual abuse she experienced there. Tr. 317:2-321:5. But Jane did recall one trip to New Mexico when she was \"15 or 16.\" Tr. 321:6-321:13. Jane testified that she flew to New Mexico with Epstein and Ms. Maxwell and stayed at Epstein's ranch. Tr. 321:14-322:6. She further testified that, at some point while she was there, someone came to her room and escorted her to Epstein's room where she was sexually abused. Tr. 322:7-323:19.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Based on this testimony and the text of the Jury Note, there is a substantial likelihood that the jury did not convict Ms. Maxwell based on Jane's testimony about the New York trips, and instead improperly based their conviction solely on the sexual abuse that Jane experienced in New Mexico. According to the Jury Note, the jurors had the mistaken impression that it would be sufficient to satisfy the second element of Count Four if they found that Ms. Maxwell had intended Jane to engage in sexual activity in New Mexico, even though such conduct was not and could not have been \"sexual activity in violation of New York Penal Law, Section 130.55\":",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Under Count Four (4), if the defendant aided in the transportation of Jane's return flight, but not the flight to New Mexico where/if the intent was for Jane to engage in sexual activity, can she be found guilty under the second element?",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "13",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00008942",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jane",
      "Epstein",
      "Ms. Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [
      "Florida",
      "New York",
      "Palm Beach",
      "New Mexico"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "02/11/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 600",
      "Dkt. 410-1",
      "Tr. 2758:23-2760:9",
      "Tr. 298:16-315:19",
      "Tr. 316:2-324:20",
      "Tr. 317:2-321:5",
      "Tr. 321:6-321:13",
      "Tr. 321:14-322:6",
      "Tr. 322:7-323:19",
      "DOJ-OGR-00008942"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript or legal document related to the case of Ms. Maxwell. The text discusses the testimony of a witness named Jane and the potential implications of the jury's verdict. The document is well-formatted and free of significant damage or redactions."
}