DOJ-OGR-00021559.pdf

Case 22-1426, Document 78, 06/29/2023, 3536039, Page129 of 217 SA-383 M6SQmax1 14 1 that for now. 2 Paragraph 72, defendant objects to the assertion that 3 Epstein briefly penetrated Carolyn's vagina with his penis 4 because her trial testimony the defense claims is contradicted 5 by a 2009 deposition testimony. I overrule this objection. 6 Again, I credit Carolyn's testimony. Carolyn plainly testified 7 to this at trial. 8 Paragraph 74, the defendant again objects to the 9 assertion as to the age and timing. Again, we'll pick up on 10 that issue when we discuss the appropriate guideline manual. 11 Paragraphs 75 and 76 the defendant objects to the 12 inclusion of these paragraphs in the presence report because 13 the perjury counts have not been presented to a jury, and so 14 she contends have no bearing on the sentence in this case. I 15 do overrule this objection. A sentencing court's discretion is 16 largely unlimited as to the kind of information it may 17 consider. It's free to consider evidence of uncharged crimes, 18 dropped counts of an indictment, criminal activity resulting in 19 acquittal in determining sentence. United States v. Bennett, 20 839 F.3d 153 (2d Cir. 2016). I may consider the information as 21 long as the information is reliable and accurate. For the 22 following reasons, I do conclude the information underlying the 23 severed perjury charges is reliable. The defendant testified 24 under oath in 2016 that she was not aware of Epstein's scheme 25 to recruit underage girls for sexual massages and other than SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.... (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00021559