DOJ-OGR-00016960.jpg

be NO Ww ws Oo OY ~] oO Ke) a oO he be No (ee) = Hs Oo _ OY a ~] a oO a Ke} 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page 34 of 95 LCT1MAX1 been given in the Second Circuit, endorsed by the Second Circuit, but both are permissible. THE COURT: But both 2772 which have been of neither of which is required think what w Circuit agreeing with Sand And so I will stick with yo request to change that out now Rakoff Judge not error, language, which is potentia text of the statute. What's next? MR. EVERDELL: that "dominant" have here is Second can be confusing. ur original for the lly confusing and not proposal and not the language adopted by because it would include the -- although deemed it would include the "one dominant purpose" moored to the The next page, Understood, your Honor. your Honor? THE COURT: Yes, please. MR. EVERDELL: Page 24. So this is the page where th charge describes the violation of New York law. THE COURT: Page? Oh, I'm sorry. I'm on my annotated version. Just a second. LSS MR. EVERDELL: Well, first, this one very small change on line 19, if we could replace "the defendant" with "Ms. Maxwell." THE COURT: Okay. MR. EVERDELL: But there's a larger request. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00016960