DOJ-OGR-00002306.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 122 Filed 01/25/21 Page 7 of 9 IV. The existence of common overt acts. The overt acts alleged in Count 1, paragraph 11, are identical to those alleged in Count 3, paragraph 17. See id. 9 3 and 17. V. The geographic scope of the alleged conspiracies or location where overt acts occurred. The geographic scope is likewise identical: New York, Florida, New Mexico, and the United Kingdom. See id. 4§| 11 and 17. VI. Common objectives. As alleged in the Indictment, the “objective” of the conspiracies was to entice and cause “minor victims to travel to Epstein’s residences in different states” for the purpose of sexual abuse. See id. 9] 2 and 17. VII. The degree of interdependence between alleged distinct conspiracies. This factor requires the Court to consider the extent to which the success or failure of one alleged conspiracy is independent of a corresponding success or failure by the other. Macchia, 35 F.3d at 671. The conspiracy alleged in Count Three is logically dependent on the success of the conspiracy alleged in Count One. The object of both, as claimed by the government, is to first entice and then to transport minors across state lines for the purpose of illegal sexual activity. If the conspiracy to entice fails there would, logically, be no one to transport. CONCLUSION The government has alleged the same conspiracy twice in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court should therefore dismiss either Count One or Count Three of the Indictment as multiplicitous. Dated: January 25, 2021 DOJ-OGR- 00002306