657.pdf

Type: pdf
Source set: house-oversight-doj
Pages: 45
Text status: Searchable text available
OCR confidence: 0.9447860807030601
Extracted text

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document657_ Filed 04/29/22 Page1of45 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC # SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Re ern fy) al     United States of America, 20-CR-330 (AJN) —V— OPINION & ORDER Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant.   ALISON J. NATHAN, Circuit Judge, sitting by designation: In 2020, the Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell was indicted for her participation in a scheme to entice, transport, and traffic underage girls for sexual abuse by and with Jeffrey Epstein, her longtime companion. The Government at trial presented extensive witness testimony from multiple victim witnesses and others, as well as corroborating documentary and physical evidence. The testimony and other trial evidence established the Defendant’s role in grooming and recruiting underage girls and using the cover of massage to perpetrate sexual abuse. Following the thirteen-day trial, the Court submitted to the jury the six counts in the Indictment. The jury deliberated for over five days and returned a verdict of guilty on five of the six counts. Two of these counts of conviction charged the Defendant with substantive violations of federal statutes that target sexual abuse of minors—the Mann Act as to Count Four and the Trafficking Victims Protection Act as to Count Six. The other three counts of conviction, Counts One, Three, and Five, charged the Defendant with conspiring with Jeffrey Epstein to violate those same statutes from 1994 to 2004. Before the Court are the Defendant’s post-trial motions making four alternative arguments for vacating some or all of her five counts of conviction. First, the Defendant argues that judgment may be imposed on only one of the three conspiracy counts (7.e., Counts One, DOJ-OGR-00010367 

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document657_ Filed 04/29/22 Page2of45 Three, and Five) because they are “multiplicitous”—meaning that they all charge the same offense—and therefore entry of judgment on all three counts would violate the …
Open in the interactive archive →