566.pdf
- Type
- pdf
- Source set
- house-oversight-doj
- Pages
- 7
- Text status
- Searchable text available
- OCR confidence
- 0.946554486303916
Original source
Extracted text
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document566- Filed 12/28/21 Pagelof7 800 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 COHEN & GRESSER LLP +1 212.957 7600 phone www.cohengresser.com Christian R. Everdell +1 (212) 957-7600 [email protected] December 27, 2021 BY ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Southern District of New York United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 82 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Dear Judge Nathan: We respectfully submit this letter to request that the Court give the jury additional instructions to correct apparent errors in the jury’s understanding of Counts Two and Four, and the law applicable to those counts, that were highlighted by the jury’s note this afternoon (Court Exhibit #15). Court Exhibit #15 reads, in relevant part, as follows: Under Count Four (4), [i]f the defendant aided in the transportation of Jane’s return flight, but not the flight to New Mexico where/if the intent was for Jane to engage in sexual activity, can she be found guilty under the second element? Count Four alleges that Ms. Maxwell “arranged for [Jane] to be transported from Florida to New York, New York on multiple occasions with the intention that [Jane] would engage in one or more sex acts with Jeffrey Epstein, in violation of New York Penal Law, Section 130.55.” S82 Ind. § 21 (emphasis added). In response to the note, the Court referred the jury to Instruction No. 21 of the jury charge. The defense believes that the Court’s response was erroneous for two reasons. 2068538.1 DOJ-OGR-00008790
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document566- Filed 12/28/21 Page2of7 The Honorable Alison J. Nathan December 27, 2021 Page 2 Constructive Amendment / Variance First, without further instruction, the jury could convict Ms. Maxwell based on a constructive amendment and/or prejudicial variance from the S2 Indictment. The Court has recently explained the law on constructive amendment and variance. “To prevail on a constructive ame…
Open in the interactive archive →