EPSTEIN
page 6 / 907 . OCR, unverified
sex toys. She was unaware that he was engaging in sexual
activity with anyone other than her in the 1990s and 2000s.
She never gave Epstein a massage. The credible testimony and
evidence admitted at trial disproves these assertions which
were made under oath.
Paragraph 79, the defendant objects to the
characterization of the offense conduct as contrary to the
trial record. Here, defense hasn't provided any reason
specifying this, and I don't see one. So based on the written
objection, it's overruled.
Paragraph 81, the defendant objects to the assertion
that Ms. Maxwell had direct responsibility for any sexualized
massages that several women or any other people that Carolyn
may have brought to Epstein's residence may have performed, and
she contends there's no record that she interfaced with these
individuals. I am prepared to overrule that objection.
The paragraph makes clear that these individuals did
not interact directly with Ms. Maxwell. Nevertheless, for the
reasons explained a little while ago in overruling the
objections to paragraphs 27 and 28, I do conclude that the
vidence at trial established that the defendant's recruitment
of Virginia set the recruitment scheme in motion that resulted
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.»
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00014762
==================== END OF root__DOJ-OGR-00014762.jpg.txt ====================
==================== DOCUMENT: root__DOJ-OGR-00014763.jpg.txt ====================
METADATA_SOURCE: .
METADATA_FILENAME: DOJ-OGR-00014763.jpg
----------------------------------------
NO
~]
Ke)
a
he
No
(ee)
=
Hs
_
a
~]
a
a
Ke}
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 779 Filed 08/22/22 Page16of101 16
M6SQmaxl
in the abuse of these individuals.
Paragraph 82, the objection is to the assertion that
the records recovered from the Palm Beach residence during the
2005 search reveal that additional minors provided Epstein with
sexualized massages between 2001 and 2004. Again, I overrule
the objection. The trial record including message pads, phone
book entries, and testimony of witnesses establishes by a
preponderance that the information contained in this paragraph
is accurate.
Paragraph 83, so there was a revision here. I'm not
po
.
sure if there is a continuing objection, Mr. Everdel The
previous objection was to the assertion that the defendant is
responsible for the victimization of untold number of other
victims. The probation department adopted the government's
suggestion, revised the paragraph to assert that the defendant
is responsible for the victimization of additional minor
victims. To the extent there is a continuing objection,
overrule it for the reasons stated regarding paragraphs 27 and
28.
Paragraph 85 is an objection to the inclusion of
Kate's victim impact statement and her status under the CVRA.
We have litigated the question of Kate's ability to make a
statement here. I believe that defense's ultimate position was
that with the requested redactions, there were no objections to
her making a statement. Do I have that right?
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.»
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00014763
==================== END OF root__DOJ-OGR-00014763.jpg.txt ====================
==================== DOCUMENT: root__DOJ-OGR-00014764.jpg.txt ====================
METADATA_SOURCE: .
METADATA_FILENAME: DOJ-OGR-00014764.jpg
----------------------------------------
NO
~]
Ke)
a
he
No
(ee)
=
Hs
_
a
~]
a
a
Ke}
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
M6SQmaxl
MR.
EVERDELL:
THE
COURT: So
Document 779
That's corre
I did reject
for the reasons explained in my order.
Filed 08/22/22
Ct,
the request
And as
Page 17 of 101
your Honor.
for redactions
[ explained in
overruling the objection to paragraphs 39 to 45,
testimony and her statement are relevan
I've indicated she may give.
pertaining to
turn to thos
when we g
EVERDELL:
calculation objections and th
that?
MR.
offense level
the financial
THE
continuing ob
requests and
penalties
COURT:
Yes,
And wi
fine and assets and the like.
t to the fin
Yes, your Ho
for now?
precisely,
I think otherwise that's it
for what
th that,
Mr.
e.
Everdell,
Kate's
t to sentencing which
there's objections
I think we can
okay with
nor.
So we'll delay the
ones related to
and we'll pick those up.
I understand to be
jections after probation responded to your
assertions.
MR.
highlight is
according to
penalties.
representatio
EVERDELL:
paragraph 173,
ns that
on covering t
it does deal
TH
ma
and 193.
hat later,
with the
COURT:
Yes,
Agree with that,
Your Honor,
there was an objection,
Mr.
Everdell?
the only one
[ believe
it's
that I would
framed
which de
we take issue with, but i+
als with the
financial
The government made in their response some
fF you're planning
we can reserve that till later because
financial penalties.
I have objections to 172,
178, 192
SOUTHERN D
STR
CT RE
PO
RTERS, P.C.»