DOJ-OGR-00020835.pdf

Case 22-1426, Document 58 02/28/2023, 3475901, Page9 of 221 A-209 3128 LCRVMAXT 1 respect to the second element. Beyond that, we're not able to 2 parse the question because we find it confusing; so we think 3 the safest course is to refer the jurors to the comprehensive 4 instruction with respect to the second element. 5 THE COURT: Mr. Everdell. 6 MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, I think the answer to this 7 question is no, and I'll tell you the rationale for this. 8 As to the jurors' note, they've clearly separated out 9 in their minds the flight to New Mexico versus the flight back 10 from New Mexico. And in their minds, there still is a 11 question, it would seem, that the flight -- whatever the 12 purpose of the flight to New Mexico was, whether it was for 13 illicit sexual activity or not, that is different from the 14 purpose of the flight back from New Mexico. And they are 15 asking can she be found guilty solely on if there's some aiding 16 and abetting, some helping of that flight from New Mexico, 17 which presumably the flight home they're saying. 18 THE COURT: So the flight from New Mexico to where? 19 MR. EVERDELL: Well, there is no record of a flight 20 from New Mexico. But what they are saying, I think, in this 21 note is they are separating out in their minds the flight to 22 New Mexico versus whatever flight she may have taken from New 23 Mexico. And I would say based on the instructions in the 24 Court's instructions which the government pointed to, there has 25 to be -- the significant or motivating purpose of the travel SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00020835