{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "1",
    "document_number": "566",
    "date": "12/28/21",
    "document_type": "Letter",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 566 Filed 12/28/21 Page 1 of 7 COHEN & GRESSER LLP 800 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 +1 212 957 7600 phone www.cohengresser.com Christian R. Everdell +1 (212) 957-7600 ceverdell@cohengresser.com December 27, 2021 BY ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Southern District of New York United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Dear Judge Nathan: We respectfully submit this letter to request that the Court give the jury additional instructions to correct apparent errors in the jury's understanding of Counts Two and Four, and the law applicable to those counts, that were highlighted by the jury's note this afternoon (Court Exhibit #15). Court Exhibit #15 reads, in relevant part, as follows: Under Count Four (4), [i]f the defendant aided in the transportation of Jane's return flight, but not the flight to New Mexico where/if the intent was for Jane to engage in sexual activity, can she be found guilty under the second element? Count Four alleges that Ms. Maxwell \"arranged for [Jane] to be transported from Florida to New York, New York on multiple occasions with the intention that [Jane] would engage in one or more sex acts with Jeffrey Epstein, in violation of New York Penal Law, Section 130.35.\" S2 Ind. ¶ 21 (emphasis added). In response to the note, the Court referred the jury to Instruction No. 21 of the jury charge. The defense believes that the Court's response was erroneous for two reasons. 2068538.1 DOJ-OGR-00008790",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 566 Filed 12/28/21 Page 1 of 7",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "COHEN & GRESSER LLP 800 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 +1 212 957 7600 phone www.cohengresser.com",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Christian R. Everdell +1 (212) 957-7600 ceverdell@cohengresser.com",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "December 27, 2021",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "BY ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Southern District of New York United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Dear Judge Nathan: We respectfully submit this letter to request that the Court give the jury additional instructions to correct apparent errors in the jury's understanding of Counts Two and Four, and the law applicable to those counts, that were highlighted by the jury's note this afternoon (Court Exhibit #15).",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Court Exhibit #15 reads, in relevant part, as follows: Under Count Four (4), [i]f the defendant aided in the transportation of Jane's return flight, but not the flight to New Mexico where/if the intent was for Jane to engage in sexual activity, can she be found guilty under the second element?",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Count Four alleges that Ms. Maxwell \"arranged for [Jane] to be transported from Florida to New York, New York on multiple occasions with the intention that [Jane] would engage in one or more sex acts with Jeffrey Epstein, in violation of New York Penal Law, Section 130.35.\" S2 Ind. ¶ 21 (emphasis added).",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "In response to the note, the Court referred the jury to Instruction No. 21 of the jury charge. The defense believes that the Court's response was erroneous for two reasons.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2068538.1 DOJ-OGR-00008790",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Christian R. Everdell",
      "Alison J. Nathan",
      "Ghislaine Maxwell",
      "Jeffrey Epstein",
      "Jane"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "COHEN & GRESSER LLP",
      "United States District Court",
      "United States Courthouse"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York",
      "New Mexico",
      "Florida"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "December 27, 2021",
      "12/28/21"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 566",
      "S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)",
      "2068538.1",
      "DOJ-OGR-00008790"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a formal letter from a law firm to a judge, discussing a court case involving Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter is typed and contains legal terminology and references to specific court documents."
}