mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES008/DOJ-OGR-00022101.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "5",
    "document_number": "36",
    "date": "06/09/20",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT Document 36 Filed 06/09/20 Page 5 of 9\n\narises where the Government conducts a joint investigation with another agency.\" United States v. Collins, 409 F. Supp. 3d 228, 239 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). In determining whether the prosecution has conducted a joint investigation, courts in this district look to a number of non-exhaustive factors, \"including whether the other agency: (1) participated in the prosecution's witness interviews, (2) was involved in presenting the case to the grand jury, (3) reviewed documents gathered by or shared documents with the prosecution, (4) played a role in the development of prosecutorial strategy, or (5) accompanied the prosecution to court proceedings.\" Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).\n\nAs under Rule 16, if the Government has represented that it is aware of and has complied with its Brady and Giglio obligations, a defendant must make a \"particularized showing that materials exist requiring disclosure\" in order to sustain a motion to compel. United States v. Juliano, No. 99 Cr. 1197, 2000 WL 640644, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. May 18, 2000); see United States v. Evanchik, 413 F.2d 950, 953 (2d Cir. 1969) (\"[T]he assurance by the [G]overnment that it has in its possession no undisclosed evidence that would tend to exculpate defendant justifies the denial of a motion for inspection that does not make some particularized showing of materiality and usefulness.\")\n\nII. Inspector General Materials\n\nThomas seeks disclosure of both the investigatory materials from the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General's (\"OIG\") investigation regarding Epstein's death, and a draft of the Inspector General's report arising from that investigation. Motion at 5. The Government concedes that attorneys from OIG participated in the Government's investigation that led to the indictment of Thomas. Gov't Opp. at 3, 19. But, the Government represents that\n\n5\n\nDOJ-OGR-00022101",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT Document 36 Filed 06/09/20 Page 5 of 9",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "arises where the Government conducts a joint investigation with another agency.\" United States v. Collins, 409 F. Supp. 3d 228, 239 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). In determining whether the prosecution has conducted a joint investigation, courts in this district look to a number of non-exhaustive factors, \"including whether the other agency: (1) participated in the prosecution's witness interviews, (2) was involved in presenting the case to the grand jury, (3) reviewed documents gathered by or shared documents with the prosecution, (4) played a role in the development of prosecutorial strategy, or (5) accompanied the prosecution to court proceedings.\" Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).\n\nAs under Rule 16, if the Government has represented that it is aware of and has complied with its Brady and Giglio obligations, a defendant must make a \"particularized showing that materials exist requiring disclosure\" in order to sustain a motion to compel. United States v. Juliano, No. 99 Cr. 1197, 2000 WL 640644, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. May 18, 2000); see United States v. Evanchik, 413 F.2d 950, 953 (2d Cir. 1969) (\"[T]he assurance by the [G]overnment that it has in its possession no undisclosed evidence that would tend to exculpate defendant justifies the denial of a motion for inspection that does not make some particularized showing of materiality and usefulness.\")",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "II. Inspector General Materials",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Thomas seeks disclosure of both the investigatory materials from the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General's (\"OIG\") investigation regarding Epstein's death, and a draft of the Inspector General's report arising from that investigation. Motion at 5. The Government concedes that attorneys from OIG participated in the Government's investigation that led to the indictment of Thomas. Gov't Opp. at 3, 19. But, the Government represents that",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "5",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00022101",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Thomas",
      "Epstein",
      "Juliano",
      "Evanchik",
      "Collins"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Department of Justice",
      "Office of the Inspector General"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "S.D.N.Y."
    ],
    "dates": [
      "06/09/20",
      "May 18, 2000"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:19-cr-00830-AT",
      "Document 36",
      "99 Cr. 1197",
      "DOJ-OGR-00022101"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case. The text is mostly printed, with no handwritten content. There are no visible stamps or annotations."
}