DOJ-OGR-00017249.jpg
643 KB
Extraction Summary
0
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
0
Events
0
Relationships
0
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
643 KB
Summary
This document is a charge related to case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. It discusses the concept of conscious avoidance and its implications for the defendant's knowledge and responsibility in a criminal context.
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Appears at the bottom of the document
|
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,550 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 228 of 257
LCKCmax9
Charge
established by a showing that the defendant was careless,
negligent, or foolish. However, one may not willfully and
intentionally remain ignorant of a material fact and important
to her conduct in order to escape the consequences of criminal
law. The law calls this conscious avoidance or willful
blindness.
An argument by the government of conscious avoidance
is not a substitute for proof, it is simply another factor that
you, the jury, may consider in deciding what the defendant
knew. Thus, if you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the
defendant was aware that there was a high probability a crime
was being committed but that the defendant deliberately and
consciously avoided confirming this fact such as by
purposefully closing her eyes to it or intentionally failing to
investigate it, then you may treat this deliberate avoidance of
positive knowledge as the equivalent of knowledge, unless you
find that defendant actually believed that she was not engaged
in such unlawful behavior. In other words, a defendant cannot
avoid criminal responsibility for her own conduct by
deliberately closing her eyes or remaining purposefully
ignorant of facts which would confirm to her that she was
engaged in unlawful conduct.
With respect to the conspiracy counts, you must also
keep in mind that there is an important difference between
knowingly and intentionally participating in a conspiracy, on
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00017249
LCKCmax9
Charge
established by a showing that the defendant was careless,
negligent, or foolish. However, one may not willfully and
intentionally remain ignorant of a material fact and important
to her conduct in order to escape the consequences of criminal
law. The law calls this conscious avoidance or willful
blindness.
An argument by the government of conscious avoidance
is not a substitute for proof, it is simply another factor that
you, the jury, may consider in deciding what the defendant
knew. Thus, if you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the
defendant was aware that there was a high probability a crime
was being committed but that the defendant deliberately and
consciously avoided confirming this fact such as by
purposefully closing her eyes to it or intentionally failing to
investigate it, then you may treat this deliberate avoidance of
positive knowledge as the equivalent of knowledge, unless you
find that defendant actually believed that she was not engaged
in such unlawful behavior. In other words, a defendant cannot
avoid criminal responsibility for her own conduct by
deliberately closing her eyes or remaining purposefully
ignorant of facts which would confirm to her that she was
engaged in unlawful conduct.
With respect to the conspiracy counts, you must also
keep in mind that there is an important difference between
knowingly and intentionally participating in a conspiracy, on
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00017249
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document