DOJ-OGR-00020766.jpg

Case 22-1426, Document “Tactaa | 3475900, Page148 of 208 | A144 | Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 7 of 34 Dkt. No. 142-1 at 2. The NPA makes clear that the covered charges are those relating to and deriving from a specific investigation of conduct that occurred between 2001 and 2007. Maxwell contends that the NPA’s co-conspirator provision lacks any limitation on the offenses covered. The Court disagrees with this improbable interpretation. The phrase “potential co-conspirator” means nothing without answering the question “co-conspirator in what?” The most natural reading of the co-conspirator provision is that it covers those who conspired with Epstein in the offenses covered by the NPA for their involvement in those offenses. Thus, it would cover any involvement of Maxwell in offenses committed by 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 S1 superseding indictment. DOJ-OGR- 00020766