DOJ-OGR-00007076.jpg
Extracted Text (OCR)
be
NO
Ww
ws
Oo
OY
~]
oO
Ke)
a
oO
he
be
No
(ee)
=
Hs
Oo
_
OY
a
~]
a
oO
a
Ke}
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
LB1TMAX1
New York.
se
no
that would be relevant that the det
ttlement or
Similarly,
financial
t received under the N
respect to the NPA.
be
prejudice
Moreover,
even
i
PA,
Document 465
Filed 11/15/21
incentive tes
So
f ther
I don't
tifies,
see any theory of
Page 25 of 127
no matter how a witness who has a
those benef
levance, it
wer som r
substantially outweighed by a significant
from int
instructed on what th
need to have i
course,
background.
and improper suggestions of
the jury on the basis of
never be admitted, but the ra
de
bal
are likely not
government
1s cont
40]
CS
and 403
ancing of
There's a risk of
I will be clear,
fense in its papers does no
Fourth guidance:
investigation,
when it indicted Jef
the Second Circuit s'
relevant and therefore
and
rey
t didn't indict Ms.
terms explained.
the NPA.
troducing the NPA.
undue delay,
non-prosecution agreement is,
403
risk of
In particular, NPA, o
sympathy or nullit
25
its are
bias
Fense has articulated with
would
The jury would need to be
and would
troversial and complicated and has a complicated
juror confus
it's not clear to me the NPA c
t justi
factors.
tionale now provided by the
ion,
fication made to
ould
fy admission based on the
The government's charging decisions
inadmissible.
The
Maxwell by the end of
the government didn't indict Ms.
Epstein originally in New
tated in White,
SOUTHERN
D
STR
CT
RE
PORT
(212)
805-0300
ERS, Ps
the F
York.
DOJ
lorida
Maxwell
As
charging decisions can be
-OGR-00007076
