mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES005/DOJ-OGR-00014629.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "229",
    "document_number": "767",
    "date": "08/10/22",
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 229 of 257 3063 LCKCmax9 Charge the one hand - and which I just explained to you - and knowing the specific objective of the conspiracy on the other. You may consider conscious avoidance in deciding whether the defendant knew the objective of a conspiracy, that is whether she reasonably believed that there was a high probability that a goal of the conspiracy was to commit the crime charged as objects of the conspiracy and took deliberate and conscious action to avoid confirming that fact, but participated in the conspiracy anyway. But conscious avoidance cannot be used as a substitute for finding that the defendant knowingly and intentionally joined the conspiracy in the first place. It is logically impossible for a defendant to intend to agree to join a conspiracy if she does not actually know it exists. In sum, if you find the defendant believed there was a high probability that a fact was so and that the defendant took deliberate and conscious action to avoid learning the truth of the fact, you may find that the defendant acted knowingly with respect to that fact. However, if you find that the defendant actually believed the fact was not so, then you may not find that she has acted knowingly with respect to that fact. Instruction No. 40: Venue. With respect to each of the counts of the indictment, you must also consider the issue of venue, namely whether any act in furtherance of the unlawful activity charged in that count occurred within the Southern District of New York. The SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00014629",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 229 of 257 3063 LCKCmax9 Charge",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "the one hand - and which I just explained to you - and knowing the specific objective of the conspiracy on the other. You may consider conscious avoidance in deciding whether the defendant knew the objective of a conspiracy, that is whether she reasonably believed that there was a high probability that a goal of the conspiracy was to commit the crime charged as objects of the conspiracy and took deliberate and conscious action to avoid confirming that fact, but participated in the conspiracy anyway. But conscious avoidance cannot be used as a substitute for finding that the defendant knowingly and intentionally joined the conspiracy in the first place. It is logically impossible for a defendant to intend to agree to join a conspiracy if she does not actually know it exists. In sum, if you find the defendant believed there was a high probability that a fact was so and that the defendant took deliberate and conscious action to avoid learning the truth of the fact, you may find that the defendant acted knowingly with respect to that fact. However, if you find that the defendant actually believed the fact was not so, then you may not find that she has acted knowingly with respect to that fact.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Instruction No. 40: Venue. With respect to each of the counts of the indictment, you must also consider the issue of venue, namely whether any act in furtherance of the unlawful activity charged in that count occurred within the Southern District of New York. The",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014629",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Southern District of New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "08/10/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "767",
      "DOJ-OGR-00014629"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript or legal instruction, with clear and legible text. There are no visible redactions or damage."
}