mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES003/DOJ-OGR-00006089.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "23",
    "document_number": "410-1",
    "date": "11/04/21",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 410-1 Filed 11/04/21 Page 23 of 93\n\nCount Two alleges that the defendant Ms. Maxwell enticed Jane Doe-1 pseudonym to travel across state lines with the intent that she would engage in sexual activity with Jeffrey Epstein in violation of New York Penal Law, Section 130.55 for which a person could be charged with a crime under the criminal or penal law of New York State. I instruct you as a matter of law that Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree, the offense set forth in Count Two of the Indictment, was a violation of New York State Penal Law from at least in or about 1994 up to an including in or about 1997, at the time the acts are alleged to have been committed.\n\nA person violates New York State Penal Law § 130.55, Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree, when he or she subjects another person to sexual contact without the latter's consent.\n\nUnder New York law, \"sexual contact\" means any touching of the sexual or other intimate parts of a person for the purpose of gratifying the sexual desire of either party. It includes the touching of the victim by the actor, whether directly or through clothing, as well as the emission of ejaculate by the actor upon any part of the victim, clothed or unclothed.\n\nAlso under New York law, lack of consent can result from incapacity to consent. A person less than seventeen years old is deemed incapable of consenting to sexual contact under New York Law. Thus, the law deems sexual contact with such a person to be without that person's consent, even if in fact that person did consent. However, in order to find that the intended acts were nonconsensual solely because of the victim's age Ms. Maxwell guilty of Count Two of the Indictment, you must find that the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant Ms. Maxwell knew that the victim Jane Doe-1 pseudonym was less than seventeen years old at the time the sexual contact alleged in Count Two took place in New York.\n\nAdapted from Sand et al., Modern Federal Jury Instructions, Instrs. 64-9, 64-18; New York Penal Law §§ 15.20(3), 130.00,\n\nCommented [CE34]: The defense requests that this language be deleted  If the Court determines that this language is appropriate, the defense requests that the following language immediately follow this language to ensure the instruction is balanced. \"By contrast, a person seventeen years old or older is capable of consenting to sexual contact under New York law and any such consensual sexual contact is legal \"\n\nCommented [RA(35R34]: GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The proposed language is legally accurate and clarifies for the jury what it means for someone to be \"deemed incapable of consenting to sexual contact \"\n\nThe defense's proposed additional instruction adds nothing and may create confusion. Jurors will understand what it means for an individual to be above the age of consent  By giving them an instruction, it suggests that the Court is providing additional legal guidance. And the guidance here misleadingly suggests that, because a person over 17 can consent to sexual contact, any such sexual contact is legal  It provides the caveat \"consensual,\" such that is confusing because the jury has just been told that people over 17— unlike people under 17—are at least capable of consent\nThis instruction would only serve to confuse the jury\n\nFormatted: Underline\n\nDOJ-OGR-00006089",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 410-1 Filed 11/04/21 Page 23 of 93",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Count Two alleges that the defendant Ms. Maxwell enticed Jane Doe-1 pseudonym to travel across state lines with the intent that she would engage in sexual activity with Jeffrey Epstein in violation of New York Penal Law, Section 130.55 for which a person could be charged with a crime under the criminal or penal law of New York State. I instruct you as a matter of law that Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree, the offense set forth in Count Two of the Indictment, was a violation of New York State Penal Law from at least in or about 1994 up to an including in or about 1997, at the time the acts are alleged to have been committed.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A person violates New York State Penal Law § 130.55, Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree, when he or she subjects another person to sexual contact without the latter's consent.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Under New York law, \"sexual contact\" means any touching of the sexual or other intimate parts of a person for the purpose of gratifying the sexual desire of either party. It includes the touching of the victim by the actor, whether directly or through clothing, as well as the emission of ejaculate by the actor upon any part of the victim, clothed or unclothed.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Also under New York law, lack of consent can result from incapacity to consent. A person less than seventeen years old is deemed incapable of consenting to sexual contact under New York Law. Thus, the law deems sexual contact with such a person to be without that person's consent, even if in fact that person did consent. However, in order to find that the intended acts were nonconsensual solely because of the victim's age Ms. Maxwell guilty of Count Two of the Indictment, you must find that the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant Ms. Maxwell knew that the victim Jane Doe-1 pseudonym was less than seventeen years old at the time the sexual contact alleged in Count Two took place in New York.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Adapted from Sand et al., Modern Federal Jury Instructions, Instrs. 64-9, 64-18; New York Penal Law §§ 15.20(3), 130.00,",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "handwritten",
      "content": "",
      "position": ""
    },
    {
      "type": "stamp",
      "content": "",
      "position": ""
    },
    {
      "type": "signature",
      "content": "",
      "position": ""
    },
    {
      "type": "other",
      "content": "Commented [CE34]: The defense requests that this language be deleted  If the Court determines that this language is appropriate, the defense requests that the following language immediately follow this language to ensure the instruction is balanced. \"By contrast, a person seventeen years old or older is capable of consenting to sexual contact under New York law and any such consensual sexual contact is legal \"",
      "position": "margin"
    },
    {
      "type": "other",
      "content": "Commented [RA(35R34]: GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The proposed language is legally accurate and clarifies for the jury what it means for someone to be \"deemed incapable of consenting to sexual contact \"",
      "position": "margin"
    },
    {
      "type": "other",
      "content": "The defense's proposed additional instruction adds nothing and may create confusion. Jurors will understand what it means for an individual to be above the age of consent  By giving them an instruction, it suggests that the Court is providing additional legal guidance. And the guidance here misleadingly suggests that, because a person over 17 can consent to sexual contact, any such sexual contact is legal  It provides the caveat \"consensual,\" such that is confusing because the jury has just been told that people over 17— unlike people under 17—are at least capable of consent\nThis instruction would only serve to confuse the jury",
      "position": "margin"
    },
    {
      "type": "other",
      "content": "Formatted: Underline",
      "position": "margin"
    },
    {
      "type": "other",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00006089",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Maxwell",
      "Jane Doe-1",
      "Jeffrey Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "DOJ"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "11/04/21",
      "1994",
      "1997"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "410-1",
      "DOJ-OGR-00006089"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell, with annotations and comments from both the defense and the government. The text includes legal definitions and instructions related to sexual abuse and consent under New York law."
}