DOJ-OGR-00021040.jpg
588 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
4
Events
1
Relationships
0
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
588 KB
Summary
This legal document is a judicial analysis regarding the sentencing of a defendant. The judge concludes that the evidence, including message pads, does not sufficiently prove the offense continued after November 1, 2004, and therefore the 2003 sentencing guidelines must apply instead of the 2004 guidelines. The judge then begins to address the defendant's objections to specific sentencing enhancements under the 2003 guidelines, confirming that the requirements for an enhancement under 4B1.5(b) have been met.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein |
Mentioned in the context of 'Epstein's house' as a location relevant to the case timeline.
|
|
| Carolyn |
Mentioned as a person whose 18th birthday is a key temporal marker for the alleged conspiracy. A message pad is dated...
|
|
| defendant | Defendant |
The subject of the legal analysis, whose sentencing guidelines and enhancements are being determined. The document di...
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| government | Government agency |
Mentioned for its reliance on two additional message pads as evidence.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the document, likely the court reporting service that transcribed the proceedings.
|
Timeline (4 events)
2004-11-01
A judge is determining whether the offense continued after November 1, 2004, to decide which sentencing guidelines (2003 or 2004) apply.
2005-03-01
A message pad, used as evidence, is dated March 1, 2005, which is noted as falling outside the scope of the alleged conspiracy.
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned as a location related to the events of the case, specifically before November 2004.
|
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,650 characters)
Case 22-1426, Document 58, 02/28/2023, 3475901, Page214 of 221
A-414
A-414
39
M6SQmaxl
1 Epstein's house after November 2004 before she turned 18.
2 Message pads entered at trial show contact only before
3 November 1.
4 The government's reliance on two additional pads that
5 were not entered into evidence doesn't change my analysis. The
6 first message GX-4B, it's undated, and the context does not
7 give sufficient confidence that it came after November 1. The
8 other message pad is dated March 1, 2005, which falls outside
9 the scope of the conspiracy alleged in the indictment, and
10 after Carolyn turned 18. Because I cannot on this record find
11 by a preponderance of the evidence that the offense continued
12 during that two-month window after November 1, 2004, and before
13 early 2005, I must apply the 2003 guidelines. Because I find
14 that the date of the offense was not after November 1, 2004, I
15 do not address the defendant's alternative argument that a jury
16 must decide if the 2004 Guidelines apply.
17 Within the Guidelines themselves, the defendant
18 objects to the application of three enhancements in the PSR.
19 She takes issue first with 4B1.5(b). The enhancement
20 statements that the offense level is increased by five if:
21 One, the offense of conviction is a covered sex crime; two,
22 4B1.5(a) for prior convictions does not apply; three, the
23 defendant engaged in a pattern of activity involving prohibited
24 sexual conduct. All three requirements are met: The defendant
25 was convicted of a covered sex crime; she was not previously
2 Message pads entered at trial show contact only before
3 November 1.
4 The government's reliance on two additional pads that
5 were not entered into evidence doesn't change my analysis. The
6 first message GX-4B, it's undated, and the context does not
7 give sufficient confidence that it came after November 1. The
8 other message pad is dated March 1, 2005, which falls outside
9 the scope of the conspiracy alleged in the indictment, and
10 after Carolyn turned 18. Because I cannot on this record find
11 by a preponderance of the evidence that the offense continued
12 during that two-month window after November 1, 2004, and before
13 early 2005, I must apply the 2003 guidelines. Because I find
14 that the date of the offense was not after November 1, 2004, I
15 do not address the defendant's alternative argument that a jury
16 must decide if the 2004 Guidelines apply.
17 Within the Guidelines themselves, the defendant
18 objects to the application of three enhancements in the PSR.
19 She takes issue first with 4B1.5(b). The enhancement
20 statements that the offense level is increased by five if:
21 One, the offense of conviction is a covered sex crime; two,
22 4B1.5(a) for prior convictions does not apply; three, the
23 defendant engaged in a pattern of activity involving prohibited
24 sexual conduct. All three requirements are met: The defendant
25 was convicted of a covered sex crime; she was not previously
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. ***
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00021040
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document