DOJ-OGR-00010373.jpg
677 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
4
Relationships
0
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
677 KB
Summary
This legal document, part of a court filing, analyzes two conspiracy counts against a defendant. Count Three (1994-2004) alleges violations of the Mann Act based on testimony from victims Jane, Carolyn, and Annie Farmer. Count Five (2001-2004) alleges violations of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act based on evidence related to Carolyn and Virginia Roberts. The defendant contends that Count Five is a subset of Count Three, an argument with which the Court agrees.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Defendant | Defendant |
The individual charged under Count Three and Count Five of the Indictment for conspiracy to violate the Mann Act and ...
|
| Jane | Victim / Witness |
One of three victims who testified at trial, providing evidence for the conviction of the Defendant under Count Three...
|
| Carolyn | Victim / Witness |
A victim whose testimony and related evidence were used for potential convictions under both Count Three and Count Five.
|
| Annie Farmer | Victim / Witness |
One of three victims who testified at trial, providing evidence for the conviction of the Defendant under Count Three.
|
| Virginia Roberts | Victim |
A victim whose related evidence was used for the potential conviction of the Defendant on Count Five.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Government | government agency |
The prosecuting party in the case against the Defendant, which presented evidence at trial.
|
| The Court | government agency |
The judicial body presiding over the case, which permitted victims to testify with pseudonyms and agreed with the Def...
|
Timeline (3 events)
2021-11-01
Date of a trial transcript referenced in a footnote, where the Court permitted victim witnesses to testify using a pseudonym or first name.
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
The location whose state law (New York Penal Law Section 130.55) criminalized the sexual activity relevant to Count T...
|
Relationships (4)
The Defendant was charged under Count Three based on evidence related to Jane, who is described as a victim who testified at trial.
The Defendant was charged under Count Three and Count Five based on evidence related to Carolyn, who is described as a victim.
The Defendant was charged under Count Three based on evidence related to Annie Farmer, who is described as a victim who testified at trial.
The Defendant was charged under Count Five based on evidence related to Virginia Roberts.
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,004 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 657 Filed 04/29/22 Page 7 of 45
B. Analysis
A further summary of the two counts at issue is required. As briefly outlined above, Count Three of the Indictment charged the Defendant under 18 U.S.C. § 371, the general federal conspiracy statute, with conspiring to violate 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a) (the Mann Act), by transporting minors across state lines with the intent to engage in sexual activity criminalized by state law. S2 Indictment ¶¶ 16–18. In this case, the relevant state offense was New York Penal Law Section 130.55, which criminalizes sexual contact with an individual known to be under the age of seventeen. Trial Tr. 3034–35. The Count Three conspiracy spanned from 1994 to 2004. S2 Indictment ¶ 17. As the Government explained in its summation, the jury could convict the Defendant under Count Three based on evidence related to Jane, Carolyn, and Annie Farmer, three victims who testified at trial. Trial Tr. at 2895.²
Count Five of the Indictment also charged the Defendant under 18 U.S.C. § 371, but for conspiring to violate 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591(a) & (b) (the Trafficking Victims Protection Act), by trafficking individuals under the age of eighteen for commercial sex acts that affect interstate commerce. S2 Indictment ¶¶ 22–24. Count Five’s conspiracy spanned from 2001 to 2004. Id. ¶ 23. The Government explained to the jury that it could convict the Defendant on Count Five based on evidence related to Carolyn and Virginia Roberts. Trial Tr. at 2896.
The Defendant primarily contends that Count Five is a subset of, is subsumed in, or is otherwise too similar to Count Three under the Korfant factors. The Court agrees. Although some Korfant factors favor the Government, the weight of the factors—supplemented by a review of the Government’s case presented at trial—demonstrates that the Government has not
² The Court permitted certain victim witnesses to testify using a pseudonym or first name. See Nov. 1, 2021 Tr. at 6–7.
7
DOJ-OGR-00010373
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document