DOJ-OGR-00021675.jpg

Case 22-1426, Document 79, 06/29/2023, 3536060, Page28 of 93 15 that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein, including but not limited to” four named individuals, none of whom was Maxwell. (A.178). Indeed, Maxwell was neither a party to the agreement nor involved in negotiating its terms. This provision “appears to have been added ‘with little discussion or consideration by the prosecu- tors.’” (A.140 (citing SA195, 211)). The NPA continues that, “upon execution of this agreement, and a plea agreement with the State Attorney’s Office, the federal Grand Jury investigation will be suspended.” (A.178). The agreement was executed on September 24, 2007 (A.182), and Epstein pleaded guilty in state court on June 30, 2008 (SA137). In 2019, the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility conducted an investigation into the negotiations around the NPA and issued a 290-page report containing detailed fac- tual findings. (SA1-348). After the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (““USAO-SDNY”) charged Max- well in this case in the Southern District of New York, she twice moved to dismiss the charges on the ground that they were barred by the NPA. The District Court denied the motions, concluding that “the NPA does not bind the [USAO-SDNY].” (A.140-45, 189-92). B. Applicable Law This Court has long held that “[a] plea agreement binds only the office of the United States Attorney for the district in which the plea is entered unless it af- firmatively appears that the agreement contemplates a broader restriction.” United States v. Annabi, 771 DOJ-OGR-00021675