Get to Know the Mar-A-Largo Superseding Documents Indictment

This website features an AI chatbot trained on the US Department of Justice’s indictment of Donald J. Trump, Waltine Nauta, and Carlos De Oliveira regarding their alleged attempt to destroy potential evidence related to a criminal investigation.

They were indicted in Palm Beach County in the Southern District of Florida following an investigation led by Justice Department Special Counsel Jack Smith.

Ask Your Questions

How to Use the Chatbot

The chat interface allows you to ask questions about the indictment. Simply type a prompt into the box.

These are some examples of questions that you might ask:

  • What is the superseding indictment?
  • What was the security video?
  • How is this indictment related to classified documents?
  • Who is Carlos De Oliveira?

You can also request plain-language explanations of what the indictment contains using prompts such as:

  • Write a 150-word summary explaining what happened with the security video.
  • Explain the indictment in language suitable for a high school class.
  • Tell me about the role of Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira and what could happen to them.

The chatbot’s answers will only be about the indictment document. It will tell you if it isn’t sure.

Sample Output

Here’s an answer we got when we asked: Write a 600 word explanation of the indictment in language suitable for a sixteen year old

This document is an indictment, which is a fancy legal term for a formal accusation that starts a criminal case. It’s like when someone points a finger at you and says, “You did it!” but in a legal way. This indictment is happening in Palm Beach County, Florida, and the people being accused are Donald J. Trump, Waltine Nauta, and Carlos De Oliveira.

The indictment says that from May 11, 2022, to August 2022, these people allegedly worked together, and possibly with others, to do some sneaky stuff. They’re accused of trying to hide or mess with important documents or objects that were supposed to be used in a court case. This is a big no-no according to a law called 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(2)(A), which basically says you can’t obstruct justice, or get in the way of the law being carried out.

The indictment also says that the defendants tried to get someone else to change, destroy, or hide an object to mess with its use in a court case. This is against another law, 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(2)(B), which says you can’t tamper with a witness, victim, or someone who has information about a crime.

Lastly, the indictment accuses the defendants of changing, destroying, or hiding a record, document, or other object from a court case. This is against yet another law, 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(1), which says you can’t kill or try to kill someone to prevent them from attending or testifying in a court case.

The indictment doesn’t give specific details about what documents or objects were supposedly messed with, or what the court case was about. These details will probably come out during the trial.

The document also says that this case has been in this court before, under a judge named Cannon, and the case number was 23-cr-80101. But there hasn’t been a complaint filed in this case, which is like a formal statement that someone did something wrong.

The document also says that no interpreter is needed for the court case, which means everyone involved can understand and speak English.

The indictment ends by repeating the general accusations of this superseding indictment, which is like an updated version of the original indictment. It doesn’t say how long the trial will last, probably because that depends on a lot of things, like how complicated the case is and how many people are involved.

So, in simple terms, this indictment is like a formal “we think you did it” from the court to the defendants, accusing them of some pretty serious stuff like conspiracy, getting in the way of justice, and messing with evidence. What happens next will depend on what evidence is presented during the trial and how the judge and jury interpret the law.

Troubleshooting

If you ask a question that the chatbot is unable to answer, you will receive a response of “Hmm, I am not sure.” Rewording your question to make it more specific may resolve this problem.

For example, rather than asking, “What could happen to Donald Trump?”, try phrasing the question as, “Does the indictment describe penalties for the charges?”

Effectiveness and Accuracy

This chatbot is intended for personal use and to allow you to understand more about the contents of the federal indictment against Donald Trump, Waltine Nauta, and Carlos De Oliveira. It is designed to answer questions related to the indictment document and is not capable of addressing hypothetical situations or unrelated issues.

For instance, if you ask, “Will Waltine Nauta testify against Donald Trump?”, the chatbot won’t be able to answer because that information isn’t included in the document and will be determined by future events. However, you can ask about the connection between Donald Trump and Waltine Nauta.

As with any AI chatbot, errors can occur. If you plan to share your chat output online or use it professionally, it’s important to verify that the information you receive is accurate and complete by reading the original indictment, consulting reliable news sources, or reviewing information from legal experts.