mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES003/DOJ-OGR-00006412.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "52",
    "document_number": "438",
    "date": "11/12/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 438 Filed 11/12/21 Page 52 of 54\n\ninto thinking that victimization was in some way relevant to its evaluation of the defendant's mens rea.\n\nBecause the Government is aware of no evidence that the defendant was a victim of Epstein, and because any such evidence may well be irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial in any event, the Court should preclude the defense from discussing it at trial absent a specific offer of proof in advance as to the nature and relevance of such evidence.12\n\nXI. The Defendant Should Be Precluded from Arguing That She Was A \"Prevailing Party\" in Civil Litigation\n\nThe Court should preclude the defense from inaccurately suggesting to the jury that the defendant prevailed in civil litigation related to some of the events at issue at trial.\n\nBy way of background, Minor Victim-2 filed a civil action in this District, bringing claims against the defendant and the estate of Jeffrey Epstein. See [redacted]. Minor Victim-2 received a substantial settlement from the estate after participating in a compensation program for victims of Jeffrey Epstein. As part of that settlement, Minor Victim-2 moved to dismiss her civil action in its entirety. The defendant—who was represented in that lawsuit by attorneys who represent her in this criminal case—asked\n\n12 The Government is not moving specifically to preclude a defense or evidence based on Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12.2 because the defense has represented that it is not planning to offer such a defense or evidence. Specifically, if a defendant intends to (1) assert an insanity defense, or (2) introduce \"expert evidence relating to a mental disease or defect or any other mental condition of the defendant bearing on . . . the issue of guilt,\" the defendant must provide written notice to the Government \"within the time provided for filing a pretrial motion or at any later time the court sets.\" Fed. R. Crim. P. 12.2(a)-(b). The defense has not provided such notice, and has informed the Government that they do not intend to rely on any defense covered by the Rule. Accordingly, the Government understands that the defense has waived any Rule 12.2 defense.\n\n51\n\nDOJ-OGR-00006412",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 438 Filed 11/12/21 Page 52 of 54",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "into thinking that victimization was in some way relevant to its evaluation of the defendant's mens rea.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Because the Government is aware of no evidence that the defendant was a victim of Epstein, and because any such evidence may well be irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial in any event, the Court should preclude the defense from discussing it at trial absent a specific offer of proof in advance as to the nature and relevance of such evidence.12",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "XI. The Defendant Should Be Precluded from Arguing That She Was A \"Prevailing Party\" in Civil Litigation",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Court should preclude the defense from inaccurately suggesting to the jury that the defendant prevailed in civil litigation related to some of the events at issue at trial.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "By way of background, Minor Victim-2 filed a civil action in this District, bringing claims against the defendant and the estate of Jeffrey Epstein. See [redacted]. Minor Victim-2 received a substantial settlement from the estate after participating in a compensation program for victims of Jeffrey Epstein. As part of that settlement, Minor Victim-2 moved to dismiss her civil action in its entirety. The defendant—who was represented in that lawsuit by attorneys who represent her in this criminal case—asked",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "12 The Government is not moving specifically to preclude a defense or evidence based on Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12.2 because the defense has represented that it is not planning to offer such a defense or evidence. Specifically, if a defendant intends to (1) assert an insanity defense, or (2) introduce \"expert evidence relating to a mental disease or defect or any other mental condition of the defendant bearing on . . . the issue of guilt,\" the defendant must provide written notice to the Government \"within the time provided for filing a pretrial motion or at any later time the court sets.\" Fed. R. Crim. P. 12.2(a)-(b). The defense has not provided such notice, and has informed the Government that they do not intend to rely on any defense covered by the Rule. Accordingly, the Government understands that the defense has waived any Rule 12.2 defense.",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "51",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00006412",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Jeffrey Epstein",
      "Minor Victim-2"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [
      "District"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "11/12/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 438",
      "DOJ-OGR-00006412"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case. The text is mostly printed, with some redacted content. There are no visible stamps or handwritten annotations."
}