mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00008981.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "2",
    "document_number": "609",
    "date": "02/24/22",
    "document_type": "Table of Contents",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 609 Filed 02/24/22 Page 2 of 13\n\nTable of Contents\n\nI. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT .................................................... 4\nII. FACTUAL BACKGROUND ....................................................... 5\nIII. ARGUMENT ................................................................... 6\n    A. Juror 50's Request to Intervene ............................................... 7\n        1. Jurors have compelling and legitimate privacy rights ....................... 7\n        2. Jurors may face criminal exposure for answers given on jury questionnaires .... 8\n        3. Intervention in criminal trials may be granted to protect the rights of third parties ............................................................... 8\n    B. Juror 50's Jury Questionnaire should be released to Counsel but otherwise remain under seal, to provide Juror 50 with a full and fair opportunity to present his position to this Court ....................................... 9\n        1. A copy of the Jury Questionnaire is necessary to comply with Judge Nathan's January 5th order ............................................... 9\n        2. The Court has the authority to release the Jury Questionnaire under seal ...... 10\n        3. The instance matter presents a compelling reason to release the Jury Questionnaire to Counsel, under seal ....................................... 11\nIV. CONCLUSION ................................................................. 11\n\n2\n\nDOJ-OGR-00008981",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 609 Filed 02/24/22 Page 2 of 13",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Table of Contents",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT .................................................... 4\nII. FACTUAL BACKGROUND ....................................................... 5\nIII. ARGUMENT ................................................................... 6\n    A. Juror 50's Request to Intervene ............................................... 7\n        1. Jurors have compelling and legitimate privacy rights ....................... 7\n        2. Jurors may face criminal exposure for answers given on jury questionnaires .... 8\n        3. Intervention in criminal trials may be granted to protect the rights of third parties ............................................................... 8\n    B. Juror 50's Jury Questionnaire should be released to Counsel but otherwise remain under seal, to provide Juror 50 with a full and fair opportunity to present his position to this Court ....................................... 9\n        1. A copy of the Jury Questionnaire is necessary to comply with Judge Nathan's January 5th order ............................................... 9\n        2. The Court has the authority to release the Jury Questionnaire under seal ...... 10\n        3. The instance matter presents a compelling reason to release the Jury Questionnaire to Counsel, under seal ....................................... 11\nIV. CONCLUSION ................................................................. 11",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00008981",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Juror 50",
      "Judge Nathan"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "January 5th",
      "02/24/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "609",
      "DOJ-OGR-00008981"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a table of contents for a legal filing. It is well-formatted and clear. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}