DOJ-OGR-00000123.tif

60a Epstein from 2001 to 2007, other offenses that were the subject of the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s Office investigation, and any offenses that arose from the related grand jury investigation. The Court has no trouble concluding that the perjury counts are not covered by the NPA. Those charges do not relate to conduct in which Maxwell conspired with Epstein and stem from depositions in 2016, more than eight years after Epstein signed the NPA. Maxwell now concedes as much, though her motion sought to dismiss the $1 superseding indictment in its entirety, perjury counts and all. The Mann Act counts, too, fall comfortably outside the NPA’s scope. The S1 superseding indictment charges conduct occurring exclusively between 1994 and 1997, some four years before the period covered by the Southern District of Florida investigation and the NPA. The NPA does not purport to immunize Epstein from liability for crimes committed before the period that was the subject of the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s Office investigation. Maxwell’s protection is no broader. The Court thus concludes that the NPA does not cover the offenses charged in the $1 superseding indictment. C. Maxwell is not entitled to an evidentiary hearing In the alternative to dismissing the indictment, Maxwell requests that the Court conduct an eviden- tiary hearing as to the parties’ intent in the NPA. The Court finds no basis to do so. The cases Maxwell cites where courts held hearings on the scope of a plea agreement mostly involved oral agreements where there was no written record of the full set of terms reached by the parties. All of them DOJ-OGR-00000123