mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES002/DOJ-OGR-00005520.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "65",
    "document_number": "382",
    "date": "10/29/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 382 Filed 10/29/21 Page 65 of 69 The government has the burden of proving the charges in the Indictment beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense bears no burden and is not obligated to disclose defense theory or strategy unless required by statute. The government seems overly concerned that the jury will be confused, a reference it uses 24 times throughout its Motions in Limine, and that the government will be highly prejudiced. Any confusion will be the result of its own presentation of evidence, the lack of corroborating evidence, and the prejudice inflicted upon Ms. Maxwell. XI. MS. MAXWELL WAS THE PREVAILING PARTY IN CIVIL LITIGATION BASED ON THE SAME FACTS AS THIS CRIMINAL TRIAL, WHICH IS RELEVANT TO MS. MAXWELL'S DEFENSE did not agree that Ms. Maxwell was the prevailing party. Mot. at 51-52. There is nothing \"inaccurate\" or \"confusing\" about 57 DOJ-OGR-00005520",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 382 Filed 10/29/21 Page 65 of 69",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The government has the burden of proving the charges in the Indictment beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense bears no burden and is not obligated to disclose defense theory or strategy unless required by statute. The government seems overly concerned that the jury will be confused, a reference it uses 24 times throughout its Motions in Limine, and that the government will be highly prejudiced. Any confusion will be the result of its own presentation of evidence, the lack of corroborating evidence, and the prejudice inflicted upon Ms. Maxwell.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "XI. MS. MAXWELL WAS THE PREVAILING PARTY IN CIVIL LITIGATION BASED ON THE SAME FACTS AS THIS CRIMINAL TRIAL, WHICH IS RELEVANT TO MS. MAXWELL'S DEFENSE",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "did not agree that Ms. Maxwell was the prevailing party. Mot. at 51-52.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "There is nothing \"inaccurate\" or \"confusing\" about",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "57",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00005520",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "DOJ"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "10/29/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "382",
      "DOJ-OGR-00005520"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell. There are several redacted sections throughout the document."
}