DOJ-OGR-00010387.jpg
709 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
1
Organizations
4
Locations
4
Events
1
Relationships
0
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
709 KB
Summary
This legal document, filed on April 29, 2022, is a court ruling denying a defendant's motions for acquittal and to vacate convictions. The ruling summarizes testimony from witnesses named Annie, Carolyn, and Kate, which established the Defendant's role in a conspiracy with Epstein to transport minors for illegal sexual activity. The evidence included the Defendant paying for sexualized massages, inappropriately touching a witness, and inviting underage girls to locations like New Mexico and Epstein's Caribbean island.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein |
Mentioned as the recipient of massages, co-conspirator with the Defendant, and owner of a private island.
|
|
| The Defendant | Defendant |
The subject of the legal document, accused of conspiring with Epstein, paying for massages, touching a witness, and i...
|
| Annie | Witness |
Testified that the Defendant touched her breasts during a massage.
|
| Carolyn | Witness |
Testified that the Defendant paid her for sexualized massages on Epstein and that she was invited to Epstein's island.
|
| Kate | Witness |
Her testimony is mentioned as corroborating the testimony of other witnesses regarding the Defendant's role in the co...
|
| Jane |
Mentioned in relation to the Defendant's conviction for intending her to engage in sexual activity in New Mexico.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Court | Government agency |
Mentioned as denying the Defendant's motions for acquittal and to vacate convictions.
|
Timeline (4 events)
2022-04-29
The Court denies the Defendant's Rule 29 motion for a judgment of acquittal and a motion claiming a constructive amendment or prejudicial variance.
The Defendant gave a witness, Annie, a massage during which the Defendant touched Annie's breasts.
The Defendant invited a witness, Carolyn, to travel to Epstein's private island in the Caribbean.
Epstein’s private island in the Caribbean
The Defendant and Epstein conspired to transport minors to New York for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity illegal under New York law.
New York
Locations (4)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
A location where the Defendant invited a witness (Carolyn) to travel.
|
|
|
A destination for underage girls mentioned in the context of the conspiracy and the Defendant's conviction related to...
|
|
|
A destination for underage girls mentioned in the context of the conspiracy.
|
|
|
Mentioned as the destination for transporting minors for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity illegal under its...
|
Relationships (1)
The document describes their joint actions, including inviting a witness to Epstein's island and their efforts to normalize sexual conduct and transport minors, as part of a conspiracy.
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,080 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 657 Filed 04/29/22 Page 21 of 45
encouraged her to massage Epstein’s feet, and that the Defendant then gave her a massage during which the Defendant touched Annie’s breasts. Id. at 2083–86. As noted above, Carolyn testified that the Defendant paid her for performing sexualized massages on Epstein. She also testified that Epstein and the Defendant asked her about her life and family and discussed sexual topics with her. Id. at 1533–36. Epstein then invited her to travel generally, and the Defendant invited her to travel to Epstein’s private island in the Caribbean. Id. at 1535, 1540. A reasonable juror could have concluded that the Defendant’s and Epstein’s actions, including their efforts to normalize sexual conduct and invitations for underage girls to travel to New Mexico and the Caribbean, were in furtherance of the conspiracy’s goal of transporting minors to New York for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity illegal under New York law. Finally, although the jury was instructed that it could not convict the Defendant solely on the basis of Kate’s testimony, her testimony corroborated the testimony of other witnesses as to the Defendant’s knowledge and role in the conspiracy. Id. at 1177–90. The Court concludes that this evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to convict the Defendant for conspiring to transport individuals in interstate commerce with intent to engage in sexual activity illegal under New York law.
Accordingly, the Court denies the Defendant’s Rule 29 motion for a judgment of acquittal.
III. The Court denies the Defendant’s motion claiming a constructive amendment or prejudicial variance.
The Defendant also seeks to vacate her convictions as to Counts One, Three, and Four (the Mann Act counts) pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33. She contends that the jury convicted her of intending that Jane engage in sexual activity in New Mexico, rather than New York, thus resulting in a constructive amendment of the Indictment, or in the alternative, a
21
DOJ-OGR-00010387
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document