mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00011234.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "2",
    "document_number": "704",
    "date": "07/12/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 704 Filed 07/12/22 Page 2 of 8\nthe public, even though the witness testifies in open court. But those categories are limited and narrowly circumscribed. For instance, victims in sex abuse cases regularly testify using pseudonyms. (See Gov't Omnibus Mots. in Limine at 7-8, Dkt. No. 380 (collecting cases)). In those cases, victims often testify \"in explicit detail,\" and revealing victim identities \"could chill the willingness of other alleged victims of sex crimes to come forward.\" See Order at 2, Martinez, No. 17 Cr. 281 (ERK) (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 18, 2017), Dkt. No. 34; see also Globe Newspaper Co., 457 U.S. at 607 (agreeing that \"safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of a minor\" is a \"compelling\" interest); 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(1), (a)(8) (providing crime victims a right to be \"reasonably protected from the accused\" and to be \"treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy\"). Courts also permit undercover law enforcement officers to testify using pseudonyms when testifying about facts related to their work, typically when doing so also poses safety concerns. See, e.g., United States v. Urena, 8 F. Supp. 3d 568, 572-73 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (permitting an undercover officer to testify using an alias \"to protect UC-188's personal safety and the viability of his current and future undercover investigation\"); see also United States v. Schulte, 436 F. Supp. 3d 698, 706-07 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) (\"Permitting certain witnesses to testify using a pseudonym and certain witnesses to testify by first name only protects the safety and efficacy of the CIA officers.\")\nII. Factual Background\nConsistent with well-worn precedent for sex abuse cases, the Government sought and received authorization from the Court for to two Minor Victims, Jane and Kate, to testify under pseudonyms, and for two others, Carolyn and Melissa, to be referenced using only their first names. The Government also sought and received authorization from the Court to refer to other\n2\nDOJ-OGR-00011234",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 704 Filed 07/12/22 Page 2 of 8",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "the public, even though the witness testifies in open court. But those categories are limited and narrowly circumscribed. For instance, victims in sex abuse cases regularly testify using pseudonyms. (See Gov't Omnibus Mots. in Limine at 7-8, Dkt. No. 380 (collecting cases)). In those cases, victims often testify \"in explicit detail,\" and revealing victim identities \"could chill the willingness of other alleged victims of sex crimes to come forward.\" See Order at 2, Martinez, No. 17 Cr. 281 (ERK) (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 18, 2017), Dkt. No. 34; see also Globe Newspaper Co., 457 U.S. at 607 (agreeing that \"safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of a minor\" is a \"compelling\" interest); 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(1), (a)(8) (providing crime victims a right to be \"reasonably protected from the accused\" and to be \"treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy\"). Courts also permit undercover law enforcement officers to testify using pseudonyms when testifying about facts related to their work, typically when doing so also poses safety concerns. See, e.g., United States v. Urena, 8 F. Supp. 3d 568, 572-73 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (permitting an undercover officer to testify using an alias \"to protect UC-188's personal safety and the viability of his current and future undercover investigation\"); see also United States v. Schulte, 436 F. Supp. 3d 698, 706-07 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) (\"Permitting certain witnesses to testify using a pseudonym and certain witnesses to testify by first name only protects the safety and efficacy of the CIA officers.\")",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "II. Factual Background",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Consistent with well-worn precedent for sex abuse cases, the Government sought and received authorization from the Court for to two Minor Victims, Jane and Kate, to testify under pseudonyms, and for two others, Carolyn and Melissa, to be referenced using only their first names. The Government also sought and received authorization from the Court to refer to other",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00011234",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jane",
      "Kate",
      "Carolyn",
      "Melissa",
      "Martinez",
      "ERK"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Globe Newspaper Co.",
      "CIA"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "E.D.N.Y.",
      "S.D.N.Y."
    ],
    "dates": [
      "07/12/22",
      "Dec. 18, 2017"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 704",
      "17 Cr. 281",
      "Dkt. No. 380",
      "Dkt. No. 34",
      "18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(1)",
      "18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(8)",
      "8 F. Supp. 3d 568",
      "436 F. Supp. 3d 698",
      "DOJ-OGR-00011234"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a sex abuse case. The text is mostly printed, with no handwritten content or stamps visible. The document is well-formatted and legible."
}