Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 310 Filed 07/02/21 Page1of3
800 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10022
COHEN & GRESSER LLP +1 212.957 7600 phone
www.cohengresser.com
Christian R. Everdell
+1 (212) 957-7600
[email protected]
July 2, 2021
BY ECF
The Honorable Alison J. Nathan
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
United States Courthouse
40 Foley Square
New York, NY 10007
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 82 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Dear Judge Nathan:
We respectfully submit this letter to bring to the Court’s attention the recent decision by
the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. William Henry Cosby
Jr., J-100-2020 (Jun. 30, 2021), in which the Court vacated Mr. Cosby’s conviction and sentence
because the District Attorney’s Office that prosecuted him failed to live up to its express promise
not to prosecute Mr. Cosby for the same crimes for which he was later convicted.! Ms. Maxwell’s
case presents a similar situation. As we argued in our supplemental pretrial motions currently
pending before the Court (Dkt. 293), the government has failed to abide by its promise not to
prosecute Ms. Maxwell for the offenses for which she was immunized by the Epstein Non-
Prosecution Agreement (“NPA”). We submit that this decision provides support for Ms.
Maxwell’s supplemental motion to dismiss Counts One, Three, Five, and Six of the S2 Indictment
for violation of the NPA.
In Cosby, Andrea Constand alleged that Mr. Cosby sexually assaulted her in his residence
in January 2004. (Op. 4-5). Ms. Constand did not immediately report the assault to law
enforcement authorities and continued to have contact with Mr. Cosby in the following months.
(Id. at 5-7). In January 2005, approximately one year after the assault, Ms. Constand reported Mr.
Cosby’s conduct to the police. (/d. at 6). The Montgomery County District Attorney’s Office
investigated the allegations, but then-District Attorney Bruce Castor determined that “there was
insufficient credible and admissible evidence” to bring criminal charges against Mr. Cosby. (/d. at
7-10). Among the factors weighing against bringing charges were that (1) Ms. Constand had
waited a year to file her complaint, which diminished the reliability of Ms. Constand’s
recollections; (ii) Ms. Constand’s statements about the events were inconsistent; (iii) there was a
lack of corroborating evidence; (iv) Ms. Constand continued to speak to and meet with Mr. Cosby
! The opinion (“Op.”) is attached to this letter as Exhibit A.
DOJ-OGR-00004810