DOJ-OGR-00004219.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 286 Filed 05/20/21 Page6of14 The government does not and cannot dispute that Accuser-3 was above the legal age of consent in England at all relevant times, and that it cannot establish that Accuser-3’s alleged sexual encounters with Epstein were anything other than consensual and lawful. Nor can the government dispute that the Indictment does not contain a single allegation that Ms. Maxwell, Epstein, or anyone else ever transported Accuser-3 or enticed her to travel—let alone with the intent that she engage in unlawful sexual activity. The Indictment offers no conceivable scenario in which Ms. Maxwell’s alleged encouragement of Accuser-3 to engage in lawful sexual activity with Epstein in England “furthered” an alleged conspiracy to cause minors to travel for the purpose of engaging in unlawful sexual activity. The government’s argument that Ms. Maxwell and Epstein’s alleged interactions with Accuser-3 were “part of” such a conspiracy uses bizarre logic. See Opp. 161. The government does not claim that any alleged interactions between Ms. Maxwell or Epstein and Accuser-3 in any way caused, or attempted to cause, any minor to travel, let alone for the purpose of the minor’s involvement in unlawful sexual activity. Instead, the government argues that because it has alleged that Ms. Maxwell “groomed” two other minor individuals who traveled and engaged in illegal sex acts with Epstein, it somehow “follows” that encouraging an individual of legal age to engage in entirely lawful sexual activity with Epstetn—unaccompanied by any alleged travel or intended travel—was “part of” conspiracies to cause underage individuals to travel. Opp. 161. Apparently recognizing the tenuous connection between its allegations regarding Accuser-3 and the alleged conspiracies, the government attempts to bolster its allegations after the fact by proffering Accuser-3’s testimony that she ST Le To the extent that it is appropriate for the Court to DOJ-OGR-00004219