DOJ-OGR-00003722.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 208 _ Filed 04/16/21 Page 14 of 16 convicted of perjury for an answer given under oath that is literally true, even if it is unresponsive and intended to mislead. The Court noted that “[t]he burden is on the questioner to pin the witness down to the specific object of the questioner's inquiry.” /d. at 360. The answers to the questions in Counts Five and Six are “literally true” as discussed in detail in Ms. Maxwell’s moving brief. Ill. The Questions and Answers Were Immaterial The government is confusing arguable “relevance” and “materiality” which “are not synonymous.” United States v. Litvak, 808 F.3d 160, 174 (2d Cir. 2015). It is not enough that any alleged “misrepresentation” concern “a variable that mattered to the” recipient of the information. The government must prove that alleged misstatements were “capable of influencing a decision” of the intended recipient. /d. It remains unclear how the government will argue this issue. However, the questions were improper and could not have produced admissible evidence for a jury to consider. There was nothing “influenced” on the part of the questioners who would not have accepted any answer from Ms. Maxwell as true. Moreover, the questions were not calculated to lead to discoverable evidence. CONCLUSION The Court has the necessary transcripts to decide this issue in Ms. Maxwell’s favor, pretrial. Accordingly, Ms. Maxwell requests that the Court dismiss Counts Five and Six. Dated: March 15, 2021 10 DOJ-OGR- 00003722