DOJ-OGR-00003099.jpg
709 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing (government opposition to motion to dismiss/sever)
File Size:
709 KB
Summary
This document is page 165 of a legal filing (Document 204) from April 2021 in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The prosecution argues against the defendant's motion to sever Counts Five and Six, stating that the perjury charges and sex abuse charges are logically connected by a common scheme. The text cites Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 8(a) and various case precedents to support the joinder of offenses.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Defendant | Accused |
Charged with participating in a scheme to sexually abuse minors and committing perjury. (Contextually Ghislaine Maxwe...
|
| Nathan, J. | Judge |
Cited in case law (United States v. Pizarro).
|
| Victims | Witnesses |
Victims of sexual abuse who would have to testify a second time if counts were severed.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court |
The Court being addressed (S.D.N.Y implied by case number and citations).
|
|
| Department of Justice (DOJ) |
Indicated by footer 'DOJ-OGR'.
|
|
| Second Circuit Court of Appeals |
Cited in legal precedents (2d Cir.).
|
Timeline (1 events)
2021-04-16
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Southern District of New York, mentioned in case citation.
|
Relationships (1)
Text refers to 'scheme to sexually abuse minors' and victims testifying.
Key Quotes (3)
"The Indictment charges the defendant with participating in a scheme to sexually abuse minors, and with committing perjury to conceal her crimes."Source
DOJ-OGR-00003099.jpg
Quote #1
"Counts Five and Six Are Properly Joined and Should Not Be Severed"Source
DOJ-OGR-00003099.jpg
Quote #2
"She has not done so, and the severance motion should be denied."Source
DOJ-OGR-00003099.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,079 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204 Filed 04/16/21 Page 165 of 239
In sum, the defendant asks this Court to dismiss Counts Five and Six by stretching to read
ambiguity into clear questions and encouraging the Court to resolve questions committed to the
jury. The Court should reject those arguments and permit the jury to resolve these issues of fact.
ambiguity into clear questions and encouraging the Court to resolve questions committed to the
jury. The Court should reject those arguments and permit the jury to resolve these issues of fact.
VI. Counts Five and Six Are Properly Joined and Should Not Be Severed
The Indictment charges the defendant with participating in a scheme to sexually abuse
minors, and with committing perjury to conceal her crimes. All six counts of the Indictment are
properly joined: they are logically connected, subject to overlapping proof, and connected by a
common scheme or plan. To sever the counts and justify holding a second trial at which a second
jury will be convened and the same witnesses—including victims of sexual abuse—will testify a
second time, the defendant must carry a heavy burden by showing substantial prejudice from the
joinder. She has not done so, and the severance motion should be denied.
minors, and with committing perjury to conceal her crimes. All six counts of the Indictment are
properly joined: they are logically connected, subject to overlapping proof, and connected by a
common scheme or plan. To sever the counts and justify holding a second trial at which a second
jury will be convened and the same witnesses—including victims of sexual abuse—will testify a
second time, the defendant must carry a heavy burden by showing substantial prejudice from the
joinder. She has not done so, and the severance motion should be denied.
A. Applicable Law
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 8(a) permits the joinder of offenses that “are of the
same or similar character, or are based on the same act or transaction, or are connected with or
constitute parts of a common scheme or plan.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 8(a). This rule establishes three
tests for joinder, each “reflect[ing] a policy determination that gains in trial efficiency outweigh
the recognized prejudice that accrues to the accused.” United States v. Turoff, 853 F.2d 1037,
1042 (2d Cir. 1988).
same or similar character, or are based on the same act or transaction, or are connected with or
constitute parts of a common scheme or plan.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 8(a). This rule establishes three
tests for joinder, each “reflect[ing] a policy determination that gains in trial efficiency outweigh
the recognized prejudice that accrues to the accused.” United States v. Turoff, 853 F.2d 1037,
1042 (2d Cir. 1988).
Charges are “similar” if they are “somewhat alike” or “hav[e] a general likeness to each
other.” United States v. Rivera, 546 F.3d 245, 253 (2d Cir. 2008) (quoting United States v. Werner,
620 F.2d 922, 926 (2d Cir. 1980) (internal quotation marks omitted). “Rule 8(a) does not require
‘too precise an identity between the character of the offenses.’” United States v. Pizarro, No. 17
Cr. 151, 2018 WL 1737236, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 10, 2018) (Nathan, J.) (quoting Werner, 620
other.” United States v. Rivera, 546 F.3d 245, 253 (2d Cir. 2008) (quoting United States v. Werner,
620 F.2d 922, 926 (2d Cir. 1980) (internal quotation marks omitted). “Rule 8(a) does not require
‘too precise an identity between the character of the offenses.’” United States v. Pizarro, No. 17
Cr. 151, 2018 WL 1737236, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 10, 2018) (Nathan, J.) (quoting Werner, 620
138
DOJ-OGR-00003099
DOJ-OGR-00003099
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document