mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES002/DOJ-OGR-00003996.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "9",
    "document_number": "246",
    "date": "04/23/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 246 Filed 04/23/21 Page 9 of 13\nThe Hon. Alison J. Nathan\nApril 22, 2021\nPage 9\nDefense counsel's investigative efforts should commence promptly and should explore appropriate avenues that reasonably might lead to information relevant to the merits of the matter, consequences of the criminal proceedings, and potential dispositions and penalties. Although investigation will vary depending on the circumstances, it should always be shaped by what is in the client's best interests, after consultation with the client. Defense counsel's investigation of the merits of the criminal charges should include efforts to secure relevant information in the possession of the prosecution, law enforcement authorities, and others, as well as independent investigation. Counsel's investigation should also include evaluation of the prosecution's evidence (including possible re-testing or re-evaluation of physical, forensic, and expert evidence) and consideration of inconsistencies, potential avenues of impeachment of prosecution witnesses, and other possible suspects and alternative theories that the evidence may raise.\nId. at (c).\nMost significantly, because the government expressly represented in their prior communications to the Court and to counsel that they would not be seeking to introduce evidence from the 2000s (apart from the perjury counts), counsel for Ms. Maxwell has already undertaken a review of the discovery focused on the 1990s and the allegations in the S1 indictment. Now that the government has completely abandoned that position and extended the conspiracy to include a time frame up to 2004, Ms. Maxwell and her counsel must re-review the discovery she has already painstakingly reviewed to comb for evidence related to the new time period.\nE. Continuing problems with the government's evidence production require additional time\nIn addition to the \"new\" 20,000 pages of exculpatory evidence not yet provided to Ms. Maxwell, defense counsel and Ms. Maxwell have encountered significant obstacles in the review of the discovery produced prior to April 13th. The production made to Ms. Maxwell at the MDC contains hundreds or thousands of missing Bates-numbers. Moreover, because the time period of the 2000s is now relevant to the trial, Ms. Maxwell and her counsel must now carefully review\n9\nDOJ-OGR-00003996",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 246 Filed 04/23/21 Page 9 of 13",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Hon. Alison J. Nathan\nApril 22, 2021\nPage 9",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Defense counsel's investigative efforts should commence promptly and should explore appropriate avenues that reasonably might lead to information relevant to the merits of the matter, consequences of the criminal proceedings, and potential dispositions and penalties. Although investigation will vary depending on the circumstances, it should always be shaped by what is in the client's best interests, after consultation with the client. Defense counsel's investigation of the merits of the criminal charges should include efforts to secure relevant information in the possession of the prosecution, law enforcement authorities, and others, as well as independent investigation. Counsel's investigation should also include evaluation of the prosecution's evidence (including possible re-testing or re-evaluation of physical, forensic, and expert evidence) and consideration of inconsistencies, potential avenues of impeachment of prosecution witnesses, and other possible suspects and alternative theories that the evidence may raise.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Id. at (c).",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Most significantly, because the government expressly represented in their prior communications to the Court and to counsel that they would not be seeking to introduce evidence from the 2000s (apart from the perjury counts), counsel for Ms. Maxwell has already undertaken a review of the discovery focused on the 1990s and the allegations in the S1 indictment. Now that the government has completely abandoned that position and extended the conspiracy to include a time frame up to 2004, Ms. Maxwell and her counsel must re-review the discovery she has already painstakingly reviewed to comb for evidence related to the new time period.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "E. Continuing problems with the government's evidence production require additional time",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "In addition to the \"new\" 20,000 pages of exculpatory evidence not yet provided to Ms. Maxwell, defense counsel and Ms. Maxwell have encountered significant obstacles in the review of the discovery produced prior to April 13th. The production made to Ms. Maxwell at the MDC contains hundreds or thousands of missing Bates-numbers. Moreover, because the time period of the 2000s is now relevant to the trial, Ms. Maxwell and her counsel must now carefully review",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "9",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00003996",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Alison J. Nathan",
      "Ms. Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Court",
      "MDC",
      "DOJ"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "April 22, 2021",
      "04/23/21",
      "April 13th",
      "2004"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 246",
      "S1",
      "DOJ-OGR-00003996"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell. The text discusses the need for defense counsel to investigate and review evidence, and highlights issues with the government's evidence production, including missing Bates-numbers and a large volume of new evidence."
}