DOJ-OGR-00018124.pdf

--- Page 1 --- **Document Header** * Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE * Document 749 * Filed 08/10/22 * Page 23 of 236 **Page Content** 1. are consistent with the way the witnesses have described, 2. certainly rebuts that argument. It's not illegal to own 3. schoolgirl costumes, but it directly speaks to a sexual 4. preference for underage girls and its relevance is readily 5. apparent in connection with the testimony in this case. 6. MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, the fact that Jeffrey 7. Epstein may have had schoolgirl costumes in 2019, 15 years 8. after the conspiracy, is not probative of anything in this 9. case. There is no link whatsoever to anything in this 10. residence so far with Ms. Maxwell. We had testimony that she 11. never lived in this residence. 12. So I don't see how anything this attenuated that 13. doesn't have a link to our client that is potentially 14. prejudicial and there is no testimony establishing its 15. relevance at all to begin with should be admitted before the 16. jury. 17. MS. MOE: Your Honor, with respect to the timing 18. issue, if defense counsel wants to argue to the jury that 19. Jeffrey Epstein somehow developed his interest in underage 20. girls after the timeframe of the charged conspiracy and in 21. 2019, they're welcome to try to advance that argument, but 22. otherwise I don't think the timing issue here is relevant. 23. It's clear throughout the testimony of the witnesses and up to 24. date that he maintain an interest in schoolgirls and that's why 25. there were schoolgirl outfits in the residence. It's clearly **Footer** * SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. * (212) 805-0300 * DOJ-OGR-00018124