mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES008/DOJ-OGR-00021734.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "87",
    "document_number": "79",
    "date": "06/29/2023",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 22-1426, Document 79, 06/29/2023, 3536060, Page87 of 93\n\n74\n\nprostitution must be a \"significant or motivating purpose\" of the interstate transportation). Maxwell only came to the theory she now advances after a lengthy discussion spanning ten pages of the transcript. (A.387). And that reading is far from clear: the jury's question does not ask whether certain facts are sufficient for guilt; it asks whether Maxwell \"can be found guilty\" if a certain fact is true. Maxwell \"can\" be found guilty based in part on sexual activity occurring in New Mexico, which is probative of Maxwell's intent and role in transporting Jane. That is a perfectly sensible question for the jury to ask—indeed, it was repeatedly raised by defense counsel to Judge Nathan at trial. (See, e.g., Tr.3149).\n\nSetting aside the jury note, Maxwell's position requires the jury to have reached a series of old conclusions. Jane testified at length about her travel to New York and the ensuing sexual abuse there. It would make little sense for the jury to reject that testimony, and then conclude that Maxwell arranged the unidentified commercial return flight Maxwell now emphasizes, for which there is no documentary evidence in the record, including no specific corroboration of Maxwell's role in arranging that flight. (Compare Br.79-80 (\"[T]he jury likely believed that if they found Maxwell had some role in arranging Jane's return flight from New Mexico, after the sexual abuse had already taken place, they could convict her on the substantive transportation count ....\") with Tr.3133 (defense argument that there is \"no evidence\" Maxwell arranged a return flight from New Mexico)). Maxwell suggests that the jury thought the flight records to be critical evidence, but the flight logs also demonstrate that Jane was",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 22-1426, Document 79, 06/29/2023, 3536060, Page87 of 93",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "74",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "prostitution must be a \"significant or motivating purpose\" of the interstate transportation). Maxwell only came to the theory she now advances after a lengthy discussion spanning ten pages of the transcript. (A.387). And that reading is far from clear: the jury's question does not ask whether certain facts are sufficient for guilt; it asks whether Maxwell \"can be found guilty\" if a certain fact is true. Maxwell \"can\" be found guilty based in part on sexual activity occurring in New Mexico, which is probative of Maxwell's intent and role in transporting Jane. That is a perfectly sensible question for the jury to ask—indeed, it was repeatedly raised by defense counsel to Judge Nathan at trial. (See, e.g., Tr.3149).",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Setting aside the jury note, Maxwell's position requires the jury to have reached a series of old conclusions. Jane testified at length about her travel to New York and the ensuing sexual abuse there. It would make little sense for the jury to reject that testimony, and then conclude that Maxwell arranged the unidentified commercial return flight Maxwell now emphasizes, for which there is no documentary evidence in the record, including no specific corroboration of Maxwell's role in arranging that flight. (Compare Br.79-80 (\"[T]he jury likely believed that if they found Maxwell had some role in arranging Jane's return flight from New Mexico, after the sexual abuse had already taken place, they could convict her on the substantive transportation count ....\") with Tr.3133 (defense argument that there is \"no evidence\" Maxwell arranged a return flight from New Mexico)). Maxwell suggests that the jury thought the flight records to be critical evidence, but the flight logs also demonstrate that Jane was",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00021734",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Maxwell",
      "Jane",
      "Judge Nathan"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [
      "New Mexico",
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "06/29/2023"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 22-1426",
      "Document 79",
      "3536060",
      "A.387",
      "Tr.3149",
      "Br.79-80",
      "Tr.3133",
      "DOJ-OGR-00021734"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript or legal brief, discussing the case against Maxwell. The text is printed and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes."
}