Case 2:17-cr-00258-VEH-JEO Document 20 Filed 11/03/17 Page 1 of 6 FILED

2017 Nov-03 PM 04:20

U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)
v. ) No.2:17-cr-258-VEH-JEO
)
JENNIFER FLYNN CATALDO )
Defendant )

RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

The United States of America by and through Jay E. Town, United States

Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, and Robin B. Mark, Assistant United

States Attorney respectfully submits this Response to Defendants Sentencing

Memorandum. The Government requests that this Court deny the Defendants

request for variance and impose a sentence of 30 months, which is within the

guideline range.

In support of this Response, the Government objects to a downward variance

for the following reasons:

I. A variance based on the proposed first offenders amendment

should be denied.

The Defendant asks the court to consider applying the proposed amendment

for first offenders to the calculation of the guideline range. The United States

Sentencing Commission requested public comment regarding the proposed

1
 Case 2:17-cr-00258-VEH-JEO Document 20 Filed 11/03/17 Page 2 of 6

amendments to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines on August 25, 2017. U.S. Sentencing

Commn, 82 Fed. Reg. 40651 (Aug. 25, 2017) 1 . The closing date for public

comment on the first offenders amendment was October 10, 2017, and the closing

date for reply comments is November 6, 2017, which is two days prior to the

defendants sentencing. Id. The United States Sentencing Commission has

previously considered a first offenders amendment to the U.S. Sentencing

Guidelines.2 It is presently unknown whether or not the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines

will be amended to include a one-level reduction in offense level for first offenders

and it is premature to assume that it will be adopted or that it would apply to this

case.

Even if the United States Sentencing Commission adopted a first offenders

reduction, it would at most be a one-point reduction resulting in an advisory guideline

range of 24-30 months. In this case, the Government intends to recommend a

sentence of 30 months, which is within the advisory guideline range whether the

Defendant is given the benefit of a first offender reduction or not. Therefore, the

first offenders reduction should not be considered.

1
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/amendment-process/reader-friendly-
amendments/20170824_rf_proposed.pdf
2
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/amendment-process/reader-friendly-
amendments/20161219_rf_proposed.pdf
2
 Case 2:17-cr-00258-VEH-JEO Document 20 Filed 11/03/17 Page 3 of 6

II. The Government objects to a downward variance

The Defendant has requested a significant variance down to 18 months

custody. The Government objects to a sentence of 18 months.

The offense conduct in this case is reprehensible. For over two years the

Defendant engaged in an elaborate scheme that preyed upon the sympathy and

generosity of her friends and family. The fact that she is well educated and has

historically been a generous person allowed her to get away with such an elaborate

scheme for such a long time. The fact is her friends and family trusted and believed

her.

In January of 2016, the Defendant took her fraudulent scheme to a new level

by creating a fraudulent GoFundMe account and using her minor child to solicit

donations to pay for a trip to Disney World. According to GoFundMe 149

individuals contributed to the Disney GoFundMe account resulting in $10,325 in

donations. The Defendant used the money to take her minor child and family on a

trip to Disney all the while leading her minor child and family to believe that the

Defendant was suffering from a terminal illness.

In September of 2016, the Defendant allowed a friend, who believed the

Defendant was suffering from terminal cancer, to create a second GoFundMe

account seeking money for the Defendants medical care. According to GoFundMe,

3
 Case 2:17-cr-00258-VEH-JEO Document 20 Filed 11/03/17 Page 4 of 6

the second account received donations from 253 individuals totaling $27,755.00 in

donations.

The Defendant received the majority of the remaining fraudulent donations in

the form of cash, checks and payments to third party vendors from friends, family

and churches. The Defendant repeatedly posted the link to the GoFundMe account

on her Facebook page along with messages and video posts expressing gratitude for

contributions, making false statements about her worsening medical condition and

references to her minor child. The Defendant also sent emails and text messages to

friends asking for money. All the while, the Defendant was using the money, in part,

to pay for the 30-40 non-prescribed Percocet a day.

The Defendants conduct affected hundreds of people, not to mention the

devastating financial burdens on her elderly parents and the mental and emotional

stress on her minor child, friends and family. The Defendant is a well-educated

person capable of being a positive contributor to society. However, she made a

choice every day for over two years to engage in conduct that hurt the lives of so

many people. Therefore, the offense conduct is not deserving of a variance.

In addition to the tremendous emotional impact on the Defendants friends and

family, the Defendants conduct affected GoFundMe. GoFundMe is an online

fundraising forum where people regularly set up accounts to help friends or family

who are truly in need. The Defendants conduct may cause individuals to be
4
 Case 2:17-cr-00258-VEH-JEO Document 20 Filed 11/03/17 Page 5 of 6

skeptical of making a donation to legitimate GoFundMe accounts. Therefore, it is

important to sentence the Defendant to an appropriate sentence that sends a message

of deterrence to others that may consider engaging in a similar fraudulent scheme.

Finally, the Defendants conduct is disrespectful to people who are truly

suffering from cancer or other terminal medical conditions and are truly in need of

financial aid. Real people endure immense pain and suffering while battle cancer.

Every day there are real people who need assistance with paying for expensive

medical bills. The Defendant mocked those who are suffering and asked people to

pray for her and send her money. Therefore, this Defendant is not deserving of a

variance.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the Defendant made a conscious choice every day for over two

years to prey upon basic human kindness. Therefore, the government respectfully

requests that the Court deny the Defendants request for a variance. A sentence of

30 months imprisonment is a reasonable and appropriate sentence that provides just

punishment and promotes respect for the law. Furthermore, a sentence of 30 months

will allow the Defendant sufficient time in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons to

participate in a drug treatment program.

5
Case 2:17-cr-00258-VEH-JEO Document 20 Filed 11/03/17 Page 6 of 6

JAY E. TOWN
United States Attorney

s/ Robin B. Mark_______________
ROBIN B. MARK
Assistant United States Attorney