mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00011284.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "2",
    "document_number": "709",
    "date": "07/12/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 709 Filed 07/12/22 Page 2 of 5\nThe Honorable Alison J. Nathan\nNovember 15, 2021\nPage 2\nIndictment occurred in 2004. It is Ms. Maxwell's position that any post-2004 statements by Epstein or other alleged co-conspirators were not in furtherance of any conspiracy at issue in this case.\nThe first exemplar is a statement allegedly from Epstein to CC-1 claiming that Ms. Maxwell \"used to find girls for him.\" This statement, or statements like it, cannot have been made either in the course of or in furtherance of any conspiracy at issue here and are no more than \"idle chatter.\" Casual conversation about \"past events,\" \"idle chatter\" between co-conspirators, or \"merely narrative descriptions by one coconspirator of the acts of another\" do not qualify as statements in furtherance of the conspiracy. United States v. Heinemann, 801 F.2d 86, 95 (2d Cir. 1986); United States v. Lieberman, 637 F.2d 95, 102 (2d Cir.1980) (challenged testimony \"smack[ed] of nothing more than casual conversation about past events. It is difficult to envision how it would have furthered the conspiracy.\")\nDuring 2005, according to the witness, she, Sarah Kellen, and (and others) were actively involved in soliciting females for Jeffrey Epstein. At that point there was no need for Epstein to encourage anyone to do anything. Allegedly saying that Ms. Maxwell \"used to do something\" is not \"encouragement\" or \"enhancement of usefulness\" or \"reassurance.\" Moreover, it is an evidentiary stretch to reach the conclusions attached to the alleged statement by the government. Assuming that CC-1 is remembering a 17-year-old statement accurately, to reach the conclusion that it was done in furtherance of the conspiracy charged in the S-2 Indictment requires a speculative and subjective interpretation of why Epstein said what he said. The entire quote from the proffer is telling. According to the FBI 302, bate\nDOJ-OGR-00011284",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 709 Filed 07/12/22 Page 2 of 5",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Honorable Alison J. Nathan\nNovember 15, 2021\nPage 2",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Indictment occurred in 2004. It is Ms. Maxwell's position that any post-2004 statements by Epstein or other alleged co-conspirators were not in furtherance of any conspiracy at issue in this case.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The first exemplar is a statement allegedly from Epstein to CC-1 claiming that Ms. Maxwell \"used to find girls for him.\" This statement, or statements like it, cannot have been made either in the course of or in furtherance of any conspiracy at issue here and are no more than \"idle chatter.\" Casual conversation about \"past events,\" \"idle chatter\" between co-conspirators, or \"merely narrative descriptions by one coconspirator of the acts of another\" do not qualify as statements in furtherance of the conspiracy. United States v. Heinemann, 801 F.2d 86, 95 (2d Cir. 1986); United States v. Lieberman, 637 F.2d 95, 102 (2d Cir.1980) (challenged testimony \"smack[ed] of nothing more than casual conversation about past events. It is difficult to envision how it would have furthered the conspiracy.\")",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "During 2005, according to the witness, she, Sarah Kellen, and (and others) were actively involved in soliciting females for Jeffrey Epstein. At that point there was no need for Epstein to encourage anyone to do anything. Allegedly saying that Ms. Maxwell \"used to do something\" is not \"encouragement\" or \"enhancement of usefulness\" or \"reassurance.\" Moreover, it is an evidentiary stretch to reach the conclusions attached to the alleged statement by the government. Assuming that CC-1 is remembering a 17-year-old statement accurately, to reach the conclusion that it was done in furtherance of the conspiracy charged in the S-2 Indictment requires a speculative and subjective interpretation of why Epstein said what he said. The entire quote from the proffer is telling. According to the FBI 302, bate",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00011284",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Alison J. Nathan",
      "Ms. Maxwell",
      "Epstein",
      "CC-1",
      "Sarah Kellen",
      "Jeffrey Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "FBI"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "November 15, 2021",
      "2004",
      "2005",
      "07/12/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 709",
      "F.2d 86",
      "F.2d 95",
      "S-2 Indictment",
      "FBI 302",
      "DOJ-OGR-00011284"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell, with references to Jeffrey Epstein and other alleged co-conspirators. The text includes legal citations and references to specific documents and testimony."
}