Epstein Secrets

tness an individual ("Employee-1") who worked for Jeffrey Epstein immediately 35 EFTA00088837 followin

osed testimony concerns the experience of manipulated and coerced victims, rather than the intentions of perpetrators. 19 EFTA00088821 return to Epstein's home for sexual abuse, or why some occasionally expressed affection for the defendant and Epstein. Although Dr. will not testify about these spe

consideration of the Court's pretrial order denying the defense's motion to strike Minor Victim-3 from the Indictment. Evidence of the defendant and Jeffrey Epstein's abuse of Minor Victim-3 is direct evidence of the offense charged in the Indictment, including the overt acts in the Indictment that pertain to Mino

elationship between the defendant and Epstein. For instance, to the extent the defense at trial argues that the defendant was merely an employee of Epstein's, this photograph is evidence to the contrary. Sixth, the defense argues that Government Exhibit 606 lacks evidentiary foundation, is hearsay, and i

sale of firearms and "narcotics transactions," are "part and parcel of the charged conduct or sufficiently similar to them); United States v. Mahe, 477 F. Supp. 2d 560, 566 (E.D.N.Y. 2007) (stating that, although the facts between two fraud schemes were "quite similar," the other acts were "a separate, disc

native, the Court Should Preclude the Government and Accuser-3 from Representing that Accuser-3 Was a "Minor," or that She Was "Sexually Abused" by Epstein, and Give the Jury an Appropriate Limiting Instruction 14 CONCLUSION 16 i EFTA00074480 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Cases Daubert v. Merre

was a "minor" at the time of the alleged sex acts, (2) to preclude the government and Accuser-3 from representing that she was "sexually abused" by Jeffrey Epstein, and (3) for an appropriate limiting instruction concerning Accuser-3's testimony. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT The government and the defense agree on at

LP 800 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 Phone: Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON, MORGAN &

s v. Figueroa, 618 F.2d 934 (2d Cir. 1980) 13 EFTA00074481 United States v. Garcia, 291 F.3d 127 (2d Cir. 2002) 11 United States v. Mahsffr, 477 F. Supp. 2d 560 (E.D.N.Y. 2007) vacated in part on other grounds 285 Fed. App'x 797 (2d Cir. 2008) 9 United States v. McCallum, 584 F.3d 471 (2d Cir. 200

native, the Court Should Preclude the Government and Accuser-3 from Representing that Accuser-3 Was a "Minor," or that She Was "Sexually Abused" by Epstein, and Give the Jury an Appropriate Limiting Instruction 14 CONCLUSION 16 i EFTA00087775 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Cases Daubert v. Merre

was a "minor" at the time of the alleged sex acts, (2) to preclude the government and Accuser-3 from representing that she was "sexually abused" by Jeffrey Epstein, and (3) for an appropriate limiting instruction concerning Accuser-3's testimony. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT The government and the defense agree on at

ER-3 Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON, MORGAN &

s v. Figueroa, 618 F.2d 934 (2d Cir. 1980) 13 EFTA00087776 United States v. Garcia, 291 F.3d 127 (2d Cir. 2002) 11 United States v. Mahsffr, 477 F. Supp. 2d 560 (E.D.N.Y. 2007) vacated in part on other grounds 285 Fed. App'x 797 (2d Cir. 2008) 9 United States v. McCallum, 584 F.3d 471 (2d Cir. 200