DOJ-OGR-00020853.jpg
630 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal correspondence / court filing (letter motion)
File Size:
630 KB
Summary
This document is page 5 of a legal letter addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated December 27, 2021, regarding the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues that the Court's response to a jury note was incorrect and prejudicial, citing Second Circuit case law regarding the importance of accurate instructions during jury deliberations. A footnote clarifies the defense's position on the jurisdictional requirements of the conspiracy counts, specifically regarding intent and the location of sexual activity (New York) involving individuals under 17.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Alison J. Nathan | Judge |
Addressee of the legal correspondence; The Honorable
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
Subject of the legal defense; arguments are made that instructions were prejudicial to her
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Second Circuit |
Cited in legal precedents (United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit)
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice, indicated by footer stamp DOJ-OGR
|
Timeline (2 events)
2021-12-27
Submission of legal arguments regarding jury instructions during deliberations.
Court (Southern District of New York implied)
Unknown
Jury interruption of deliberations to seek explanation of the law (referenced in argument).
Courtroom
Jury
The Court
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in case law citations (Hudson v. New York City) and in the footnote regarding state statutes.
|
Relationships (1)
The document is written by counsel ('we believe') advocating on behalf of 'Ms. Maxwell'.
Key Quotes (3)
"Second, we believe that the Court’s response to the jury note was substantively incorrect and prejudicial to Ms. Maxwell."Source
DOJ-OGR-00020853.jpg
Quote #1
"Reversal is “required where, based on a review of the record as a whole, the error was prejudicial or the charge was highly confusing.”"Source
DOJ-OGR-00020853.jpg
Quote #2
"the jury cannot convict Ms. Maxwell on those counts without finding that she acted with the intent that someone under the age of 17 would engage in sexual activity within the state of New York that violated New York law."Source
DOJ-OGR-00020853.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document