Case 1:17-cr-00307-DLC Document 38 Filed 09/22/17 Page 1 of 1

CO V I N G TO N Ado Devlln-Brown
BEIJING BRUSSELS OUBAI JOHANNESBURG LONDON Covington & Burling LIP
Los ANGELES NEW YORK SAN FRANCISCO SEOUL The New York Times Building
SHANGHAI SILICON VALLEY WASHINGTON 620 Eighth Avenue
NewYork, NY 10018-1405
T +12128411046
adevlin-hrown@cov.com

September 22, 2017

By Hand and ECF

Hon. Denise L. Cote

United States District Judge
United States Courthouse
500 Pearl St.
New York, NY 10007

Re: United States v. Anthony Weiner, 17 Cr. 307

Dear Judge Cote:

Pursuant to the Courts order of September 19, 2017, we have conferred with the
Government as to whether any portions of Exhibit 43 are appropriate for public filing. We have
agreed that a redacted form of Exhibit 43 can be publically filed and that limited redactions,
highlighted in the enclosed exhibit, can be made for the reasons identified in the defenses letter
to the Court, dated September 13, 2017 (Doc. No. 26). We also propose that the final sentence in
footnote 41 on page 45 of Mr. Weiners sentencing submission be unredacted, to reflect the
changes in Exhibit 43. With the Courts approval, we will file revised redacted versions of
these documents on ECF.

In addition, we are submitting a letter that we received from a member of the community
who asked that the letter be submitted to the Court for consideration at sentencing. The version
of the letter filed on ECF contains proposed redactions, specifically, in accordance with your
Honors Individual Rules of Practice for Sentencing Proceedings, home address information.

We are available to provide any further information the Court requires to assess this
request.

Respectfully submitted,

Arlo Devlin-Brown
Erin Monju
cc: Amanda Kramer, Esq.
Stephanie Lake, Esq.
Case 1:17-cr-00307-DLC Document 38-1 Filed 09/22/17 Page 1 of 6

Exhibit 43
 Case 1:17-cr-00307-DLC Document 38-1 Filed 09/22/17 Page 2 of 6

Paul Kelly Counseling

New York, NY

9/12/17

Hon. Denise L. Cote

United States District Judge
United States Courthouse
500 Pearl St.
New York, NY 10007

Dear Judge Cote:

My name is Paul Kelly and am a Psychotherapist, Licensed Mental Health Counselor, and Certified
Sex
Addiction Therapist (CSAT) practicing in New York City. I have been working with Anthony Weiner
since
January 23, 2017. I am writing to offer you information you may find helpful when considering
the
sentencing of Anthony.

I would like to begin by saying that I am writing with a keen awareness of my responsibility not
only as an
advocate for Anthonys mental, emotional, and psychological health but also as a mandated reporter
of
any situation where I feel a minor may be at risk of physical, mental, or emotional harm. As clinician
a
licensed by the state of New York I have an obligation not only to my clients but also to the public.
With
both these obligations in mind, and with more than 25 years of experience working with many sex
addicts
in various capacities, and having worked therapeutically with Anthony more extensively than
any of his
previous therapists, I would like to state that I believe that Anthony is very unlikely to repeat the offense
for which he is before the Court the Transfer of Obscene Material to a Minor and, as long


as he
continues his current course of treatment, is unlikely to relapse into other problematic sexual behavior.

I would like to start with my observation that Anthony has been struggling for some time with
sexual
compulsivity problems, sometimes referred to as sex addiction. This disorder encompasses range
a of
compulsive sexual behaviors, and does not always include physical sexual encounters in fact, it often
does not. In Anthonys case, his negative sexual behavior has revolved around sexually explicit
communications with strangers on the internet. For him, communication and affirmation are
his goals,
not actual physical sexual contact, and the communications he has sought have consistently been
with
consenting adults. The exchange he had which crossed legal boundaries was an anomaly.

I think it is also important to point out that Anthonys illegal behavior was an anomaly and fell well outside
of his typical sexual behavior even his sexually compulsive behavior because Anthony does not

-
show
any predatory behavior, nor any unusual inclination toward individuals below the age of majority.
While
he has shown significantly poor judgement and a self-defeating tendency to engage sexual activities
that
are detrimental to his own best interests, these encounters have always been with consenting adults.
His
engagement with a person under the age of majority was well outside his general pattern of behavior
and
is therefore very unlikely to recur.

Anthonys current treatment is comprised of individual therapy once a week, group therapy once
a week,
12-Step meetings 4-5 times a week, periodic weekend intensives every 4-6 months, daily check-ins
with
his therapist, sponsor, therapy group members, or 12-Step sober supports, restriction of his
access to
pornography and social media websites, and active focus on being of service to his son
his wife,
Huma, and other addicts seeking recovery from sex addiction. He has also taken ajob to ensure
his gainful

1
 Case 1:17-cr-00307-DLC Document 38-1 Filed 09/22/17 Page 3 of 6

employment but more importantly to ensure his sense of purpose and usefulness, and to provide
structure to his days. Anthony has shown steady and consistent progress in all these areas even in the
most trying of circumstances, Is there more progress to be made? Yes, but I have confidence that with
continued work in the manner he has been engaging Anthony will continue to maintain healthy and
appropriate social and sexual boundaries.

Having reviewed the Adult Sexual Risk Evaluation and Psychosexual Assessment prepared by Dr.
Shoshanna Must, dated September 11, 2017, I generally concur with her findings and would like to
underscore several key points that may get somewhat obscured in the volume of information presented
in her report. I am also in general agreement with Dr. Musts recommendations and will provide
information on the status of Anthonys response to each of them.

First, I think it is very important to underscore, as Dr. Musts clearly states: There is nothing to suggest
in
Mr. Weiners history that he has any history of contact sexual offending behavior. (Pg. 20) And: There
is no other part of Mr. Weiners known sexual history background to suggest that he has a paraphilia or
paraphilic disorder, or history of sexually offending or nuisance behavior. (Pg. 20) And: Mr. Weiner does
not have a history of trying to gain access to children, he does not emotionally identify with children, and
his known sexual history is comprised of sexual interactions with adults. (Pg. 27) This is all consistent with
my own observations of Anthonys arousal patterns, attractions and behaviors.

These are very important statements and may seem at odds with what many have come to think of as
their image of Anthony Weiner based on what theyve heard in the media. But it is important to remember
that Anthonys poor reputation in the public eye is for foolish and self-destructive behavior he has
engaged in with adult women, not minors. The illegal event the Transfer of Obscene Materialto a Minor
was an anomaly and outside Anthonys typical behavior.

The illegal behavior Anthony did engage in can be most simply stated as his having had sexually explicit
interactions over the internet with a 15-year-old. The primary question, for me, as his therapist, and
no
doubt an important consideration for you, as you consider his sentencing may be virtually the same: How
can we reduce the chances that Anthony will do this again, and how can we assure that Anthony will make
appropriate reparations/amends for his actions?

To a certain degree, the first part of this question is answered within Dr. Musts assessment based on
several Risk Assessments she administered (Static 99-R and Stable 2007). As Dr. Must notes, these tests
indicate that if left in the community Anthony would have an Average risk of reoffending (pg. 26), but it
must be noted and made clear that average in this case means only a 7.5% chance (NOT 50/50). This
means that his assessments indicate that if left within the community there would be a 92.5% chance that
Anthony would NOT have another legal sexual problem (Pg. 26). It is also important to note that the 7.5%
chance of reoccurrence is further reduced by the fact that Anthony does not demonstrate any of the
antisocial correlates that are the most robust risk factors when considering re-offense concerns. (Pg.
27)

Further reducing Anthonys likelihood of recidivism are several very strong factors in his favor, again
as
recognized by Dr. Must and with which I concur: Anthony possesses above average intelligence, he
is
engaged in learning to self-regulate more effectively, he has a sincere motivation to be a productive

2
 Case 1:17-cr-00307-DLC Document 38-1 Filed 09/22/17 Page 4 of 6

member of society, he is developing a strong social and recovery supports system, he shows significant
fortitude and persistence, and is fully engaged in therapy.

Perhaps one of the most significant factors motivating Anthony to avoid any potentially problematic
behaviors is his relationship with his sot . is Anthonys only child and Anthony has become
acutely aware of how his own behavior impacts this
I Anthony is a completely devoted
father to For the majority of young life,nI
NI lN N
I I I I I II I I I I I
I liii I1I[l iiii I I i
lilt I HI Sil I 11I11 ii I II
I I I I I II I I I I I
iSii 11111 111111 ILLNI I 11 I1UIUI
I III
With all this said, I am in full agreement with Dr. Musts conclusion that: Mr. Weiners risk factors
can be managed in the community and treated in an outpatient sex-offense-specialized treatment
program. (Pg. 28).

Regarding Dr. Musts specific recommendations, here are mythoughts. (Dr. Musts recommendations are
in bold. My responses follow each recommendation.)

It is recommended that Mr. Weiner enter into a sex-offense-specific treatment program where
he can address the risk factors described above in a setting that takes into consideration the
offense behavior.
o I am in agreement with Dr. Must regarding the benefit of having Anthony participate in a
sex-offender-specific program but I am also in agreement with her assessment that; Mr.
Weiner may have a difficult time settling into a sex offense treatment program and will
most likely require a lot of patience and psychoeducation to help him identify with other
males and not minimize his behavior. [Pg. 281 It is also my experience that sex-offender
groups are often comprised of individuals with significantly higher levels of offense
behavior than Anthony committed. This can also sometimes present therapeutic
obstacles. For this reason I would suggest that the best course of action is to have
Anthony continue his current treatment and add to it more elements of the sex-offender
model. This strategy is already built into his current treatment plan.

It should also be noted that effective sex offender treatment programs are very difficult
to engage in within the prison system. This is due to a combination of factors including
limited space in programs available, time constraint due to sentencing times, and the
fundamental limitations of learning skills within a confinement environment that are
essentially necessary for when the individual is free within the community. It is much
mote effective to have an individual improve his social interactions skills within the social
environment in which he is likely to live. Anthony is much mote likely to have success
with a long-term outpatient model than a short-term inpatient or confinement model.

It is recommended that Mr. Weiner continue to receive individual and group mental health
treatment with his same therapist given the benefit Mr. Weiner reports of both helping him
manage his hypersexuality as well as provide a broader support network to help replace the
one he had prior to his legal circumstances, It is recommended that this person participate on
the treatment team in case conference with probation and treatment if consented by Mr.
Weiner.

3
 Case 1:17-cr-00307-DLC Document 38-1 Filed 09/22/17 Page 5 of 6

o I agree with Dr. Must and would be very happy to continue working with Anthony both in
individual therapy and group therapy. I am also happy to participate as part of a
treatment team and in case conferences with Probation.

It is strongly recommended that the entirety of Mr. Weiners electronic devices be monitored,
not just his cell phone.
o Monitoring software was added to the iPad in Anthonys home immediately upon
receiving Dr. Musts recommendation in an earlier version of the report, dated August 18,
2017, and restrictions that meet or exceed those on his iPhone were also installed. The
same has been done on his wifes desktop computer at home. These two items plus his
personal phone constitute the full array of devices to which Anthony has regular access.

Mr. Weiner should not be permitted to access pornography of any kind until completely vetted
by his treatment team and probation it is recommended that this be a condition of his
supervised release.
o Though this recommendation may indicate an overabundance of caution on Dr. Musts
part, it is reasonable and, I believe, will be helpful in the long run. Since there is no
detrimental downside to it, I would fully endorse this recommendation. However, I would
like to underscore an important point. Anthonys compulsion is not to pornography, and
it is certainly not to interactions with minors. Anthony has an addictive, compulsive
tendency toward social/sexual interactions with anonymous adult women via the
internet, It is more important to limit Anthonys access to social media sites than
pornography itself. While I fully recognize that pornography contributes to distortions in
how we view sex and sexual partners, and is generally a significant societal problem, it is
not at the heart of Anthonys problematic behavior. That said, I would, as stated above,
support restricting and/or vetting Anthonys use of pornography.

Mr. Weiners computers should immediately be monitored with computer monitoring software
including any smart phones or Internet accessible devices.
o Im in full agreement with this, as is Anthony, and this was implemented following the
initial draft of the report on August 18, 2017.

It is recommended that this report be shared with treatment providers.

o Anthony and his lawyers shared the report and asked my opinion, much of which has been
expressed here above.

I would like to make one final point, and it harkens back to a point I made at the top of this letter. It
is
related to the balance of my duty to my client and my duty to the general public. In this case, two specific
members of that public. One, of course, is the 15-year old young woman to whom Anthony clearly owes
amends.

4
 Case 1:17-cr-00307-DLC Document 38-1 Filed 09/22/17 Page 6 of 6

I I U I I Besides, as has been well

documented, creameni programs within the prison system are woeiully inadequate
both in their
availability and, sadly, in there quality.

Little good would be served by removing Anthony from his son and from the therapeutic work
he has
been so diligently and successfully pursuing. Disrupting his recovery process now would actually

be
more likely to set back his progress, which I cant see as a benefit for anyone.

It is my hope and recommendation that you will consider any number of alternatives to incarceration
and
that whatever sentence you choose includes ongoing individual therapy, group therapy, and
12-Step
recovery work.

Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully,

/ /

Paul Kelly, MA, LMHC, CSAT

5
 Case 1:17-cr-00307-DLC Document 38-2 Filed 09/22/17 Page 1 of 1

September 18, 2017

Dear Judge Cote,

I am not a close friend of Anthony Weiners, but as a community leader and constituent,
I met Anthony many times, both in his role as congressman and as aide to Sen.
Schumer. Anthony always stood out because of his devotion to his constituents; the
needs of our community were his top concern. He tirelessly attended community
meetings and fundraisors, and he always wanted to know what he could do to better our
neighborhood. Unlike some politicians who have ended up in court, Anthony was
always true to his constituents; he didnt sell his vote or pilfer funds.

I also want to say a few words about the nature of Anthonys crime. Had he attacked a
15 year old girl in the park, that would have been unforgivable; however, that was not
the nature of his crime. If Anthony is free to move about in society, no ones child is in
danger of being physically attacked by him. I think that this distinction is very important
when deciding on his punishment.

I cant begin to speculate what happened to Anthony, but I know that he has already
paid a tremendous price for his actions: he has lost his profession, his wife, and his
reputation. Adding jail time would serve no useful purpose; Anthonys life has already
been ruined forever. Would you please show mercy to a man who did a tremendous
amount of good for many, many people, and balance out his good, past actions against
his unlawful behavior?

Respectfully,
7

Barbara Barren

Brooklyn, NY