DOJ-OGR-00001779.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 60 Filed 10/06/20 Page 1 of 3 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of New York The Silvio J. Mollo Building One Saint Andrew’s Plaza New York, New York 10007 October 6, 2020 BY ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Southern District of New York United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square New York, New York 10007 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Dear Judge Nathan: The Government respectfully submits this letter to request that the Court grant the Government permission to delay disclosure to the defense of certain photographs of and documents regarding victims of sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein. These materials relate to abuse that post- dated the time period charged in the Indictment, and the Government does not intend to offer them at trial. Although the Government intends to produce these materials to the defendant in advance of trial, premature disclosure of these materials could jeopardize the Government’s ongoing investigation and would reveal sensitive victim information months in advance of trial. For these reasons and as set forth below, the Government respectfully submits, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(d)(1), that good cause exists to delay disclosure of these items to defense counsel until eight weeks prior to trial.! The Government has conferred with defense counsel, who have indicated that they object to this request and intend to submit a letter in opposition. As the Court is aware, the superseding indictment in this case (the “Indictment’”) charges the defendant in six counts. Count One of the Indictment charges Maxwell with conspiring with Epstein and others to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, in violation of 18 U.S.C. ' Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16 provides for the production of discovery to a defendant, upon request, of certain materials, such as documents that are material to the preparation of the defense and documents the Government intends to use in its case-in-chief at trial. However, Rule 16(d)(1) also provides that: At any time the court may, for good cause, deny, restrict, or defer discovery or inspection, or grant other appropriate relief. The court may permit a party to show good cause by a written statement that the court will inspect ex parte. A finding of good cause “‘must be based on a particular factual demonstration of potential harm, not on conclusory statements.’” United States v. Gangi, No. 97 Cr. 1215 (DC), 1998 WL 226196, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. May 4, 1998) (quoting Anderson v. Cryovac, Inc., 805 F.2d 1, 8 (1st Cir. 1986)). DOJ-OGR-00001779