DOJ-OGR-00014315.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page11of95 2749 LCI1MAX1 1 of the conspiracy is to violate New York law, then an 2 invitation to an island that's not New York doesn't count. 3 And also, an invitation to travel to New Mexico to do 4 whatever it is they were planning on doing in New Mexico is 5 also not a goal of violating New York law. I'm sorry, from 6 Arizona. So there's no connection to New York law with respect 7 to Annie's testimony either. 8 And so whatever purpose they want to glean from those 9 two witnesses' testimony, Kate and Annie, or even Carolyn, the 10 object of this conspiracy, for this to be a crime, it can only 11 be hung on the testimony, at least in the evidence in the 12 record, the testimony of Jane. And -- 13 THE COURT: You're doing precisely what Mr. Rohrbach 14 said, which is you're switching back and forth between the 15 conspiracy and the substantive count. So Annie, for example, 16 the evidence is the conduct occurred in New Mexico. That's why 17 I gave the limiting instruction. But that could be considered 18 with other evidence of the conspiracy with respect to New York, 19 the violation of New York law. You don't have to have the 20 violation of New York law to establish the elements of the 21 conspiracy count. 22 So the objection is overruled. 23 Next. 24 MR. EVERDELL: All right. Next is line 13, your 25 Honor, same page. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00014315