mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00010703.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "12",
    "document_number": "675",
    "date": "06/25/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 675 Filed 06/25/22 Page 12 of 21\na late-filed victim impact statement, finding that the parole board may waive one or more requirements in order to further its policy of ensuring that crime victims are treated with fairness, sensitivity and dignity).\n\nIII. The Court Should Exercise Its Discretionary Authority to Consider the Victim Impact on Women Who have Suffered from the Most Notorious Long-running Sex Trafficking Operation in Modern American History\n\nIn this case especially, the Court should exercise its broad discretion to hear and consider all information relevant to sentencing. First, allowing women who were sexually abused and trafficked by Maxwell's conspiracy to speak will have an important cathartic benefit not only for the victims speaking, but for those who are unable to speak as well. Second, in this case in particular, too many unanswered questions remain about the scope and participants in this long-running wide-ranging sex trafficking conspiracy - leading many Americans to believe that authorities continue to hide the complete truth about what happened. Allowing all victims who wish to speak to do so publicly will promote transparency and help to dispel some of those concerns.\n\nA. Prohibiting Maxwell's Victims from Speaking Unfairly Denies Victims Important Cathartic Bene ts\n\nAllowing crime victims to speak at a defendant's sentencing can have significant psychological and emotional benefits for those victims. See generally Paul G. Cassell, In Defense of Victim Impact Statements, 6 OHIO ST. J. OF CRIM. L. 611, 621-23 (2009). As one federal district court explained, \"[E]ven if a victim has nothing to say that would directly alter the court's sentence, a chance to speak still serves important purposes.... '[Victim] allocution is both a rite and a right.'\" United States v. Degenhardt, 405 F. Supp. 2d 1341, 1349 (D. Utah. 2005) (quoting United States v. De Alba Pagan, 33 F.3d 125, 129 (1st Cir. 1994)).\n12\nDOJ-OGR-00010703",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 675 Filed 06/25/22 Page 12 of 21",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "a late-filed victim impact statement, finding that the parole board may waive one or more requirements in order to further its policy of ensuring that crime victims are treated with fairness, sensitivity and dignity).",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "III. The Court Should Exercise Its Discretionary Authority to Consider the Victim Impact on Women Who have Suffered from the Most Notorious Long-running Sex Trafficking Operation in Modern American History",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "In this case especially, the Court should exercise its broad discretion to hear and consider all information relevant to sentencing. First, allowing women who were sexually abused and trafficked by Maxwell's conspiracy to speak will have an important cathartic benefit not only for the victims speaking, but for those who are unable to speak as well. Second, in this case in particular, too many unanswered questions remain about the scope and participants in this long-running wide-ranging sex trafficking conspiracy - leading many Americans to believe that authorities continue to hide the complete truth about what happened. Allowing all victims who wish to speak to do so publicly will promote transparency and help to dispel some of those concerns.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A. Prohibiting Maxwell's Victims from Speaking Unfairly Denies Victims Important Cathartic Bene ts",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Allowing crime victims to speak at a defendant's sentencing can have significant psychological and emotional benefits for those victims. See generally Paul G. Cassell, In Defense of Victim Impact Statements, 6 OHIO ST. J. OF CRIM. L. 611, 621-23 (2009). As one federal district court explained, \"[E]ven if a victim has nothing to say that would directly alter the court's sentence, a chance to speak still serves important purposes.... '[Victim] allocution is both a rite and a right.'\" United States v. Degenhardt, 405 F. Supp. 2d 1341, 1349 (D. Utah. 2005) (quoting United States v. De Alba Pagan, 33 F.3d 125, 129 (1st Cir. 1994)).",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "12",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00010703",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Maxwell",
      "Paul G. Cassell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "DOJ"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Utah"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "06/25/22",
      "2009",
      "2005",
      "1994"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 675",
      "6 OHIO ST. J. OF CRIM. L. 611",
      "405 F. Supp. 2d 1341",
      "33 F.3d 125",
      "DOJ-OGR-00010703"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell. The text discusses the importance of allowing victims to speak at the sentencing hearing and cites various legal precedents. The document is well-formatted and free of significant damage or redactions."
}