The ruling keeps all three Alexander brothers — Alon, Oren and Tal — on course for trial on federal charges alleging they drugged and sexually assaulted dozens of women over nearly two decades, using wealth built through luxury real estate sales in New York, Miami and Los Angeles.
A federal judge in Manhattan on Monday rejected one of three brothers’ bid to use his engagement and marriage as evidence of withdrawal from an alleged sex trafficking conspiracy, ruling the argument legally insufficient and barring the evidence from trial. Jury selection in the case is scheduled to begin the following week.
U.S. District Judge Valerie E. Caproni denied Alon Alexander’s motion to dismiss one count of his federal indictment and ruled that he is also precluded from introducing evidence of his engagement and marriage before the jury.
The three brothers — Alon, Oren and Tal Alexander — are jailed without bail after pleading not guilty to conspiracy and other charges alleging they drugged and sexually assaulted dozens of women. Trial is scheduled to begin in Manhattan federal court the week of January 19.
The charges
Oren Alexander and Tal Alexander sold high-end properties in New York City, Miami and Los Angeles before the charges were filed. Prosecutors allege the brothers used their wealth and influence to attack women from 2002 to 2021.
Alon Alexander’s motion
Alon Alexander’s lawyers argued that his 2019 engagement and subsequent marriage signaled his exit from “the single life” and amounted to a withdrawal from any alleged conspiracy.
Caproni said he “saw an opportunity to reach for the prize” in attempting to win an acquittal on that basis.
The judge wrote that proof of the engagement and marriage — including photographs, social media posts, home videos, statements from co-defendants and a rabbi — was irrelevant hearsay that could not be introduced at trial.
In a footnote, Caproni wrote that the withdrawal argument “fails to adequately grapple with the nuance of the Government’s allegations or the contours of a sex trafficking conspiracy more generally.”
She rejected the premise that a change in relationship status was incompatible with continued participation in the alleged conspiracy.
“There are plenty of single men who engage in sexual activity without trafficking, drugging, or raping women and girls,” the judge said. “By the same token, the inverse of the Government’s alleged conspiracy is not, for example, ‘the engaged life’ or ‘the married life.’”
She concluded there was nothing about the “mere transition from ‘single’ to ‘engaged’ that clearly indicates that Defendant withdrew himself from the conspiracy, or that he would cease helping his brothers accomplish the goals of the conspiracy — even if his participation in the scheme no longer involved him having sex (consensual or otherwise) with women that were not his fiancee.”