United States v. Valle
Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York
301 F.R.D. 53 (2014)
- Written by Samantha Arena, JD
Facts
The United States government (plaintiff) charged Gilberto Valle (defendant) with conspiracy to kidnap multiple women based on internet conversations Valle had with Michael Van Hise, Aly Khan, and Dale Bolinger on a fantasy sexual fetish website. The men lived in New York, New Jersey, India or Pakistan, and England, respectively, and all conversations among them took place over the internet. The men never attempted to meet or make contact via telephone. Valle had similar communications about kidnapping, torturing, raping, and cannibalizing women with approximately 24 different individuals, 21 of whom the government conceded did not rise above the level of fantasy role-play. Nevertheless, the government argued that Valle’s communications with Van Hise, Khan, and Bolinger constituted a genuine kidnapping conspiracy. During the conversations, the men discussed dates on which kidnappings would occur, as well as locations, including Manhattan, India, and Ohio. During the communications, Valle often lied about important details, including whether he possessed some of the resources that could be used in the kidnapping. Valle also lied about details concerning the targeted women and refused to provide the others with names and addresses that would have allowed them to locate or identify the women. Ultimately, no women were kidnapped, nor were any attempts made. Valle moved for judgment of acquittal, contending that the government failed to prove that the interactions were more than fantasy role-play.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gardephe, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.