DOJ-OGR-00011371.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 723 Filed 07/12/22 Page9of13 The Honorable Alison J. Nathan December 16, 2021 Page 9 C. Kelly Bovino’s testimony will contradict Jane’s testimony. Kelly’s testimony will also contradict Jane’s testimony. As to Kelly, this is what Jane testified to on the stand: e Kelly was “another person [Jane] remembered.” TR at 527. e Jane remembered Kelly’s last name. /d. e Kelly was a model who was older than her. /d. e Kelly could “back up what [Jane] was talking about.” /d. During her February 2020 interview with the government, Jane told agents that Kelly’s last name was “Bovino” and that Jane “felt [Kelly] could back up what [Jane] had talked about regarding Maxwell. Jane described Kelly as being a model, who was older than [Jane] and knew Epstein and Maxwell before she did.” See 3509-008, p 5-6. Kelly’s testimony will contradict Jane’s testimony because Kelly will not back up Jane’s account of the sexualized group massages. And there is no doubt Kelly Bovino, who Ms. Maxwell intends to call as a witness, is the same “Kelly” who Jane claimed was “back up” what Jane alleged. Jane admitted that Kelly’s last name was “Bovino.” As with Eva and Michelle, Ms. Maxwell has a right to present the testimony of Kelly, who will contradict Jane’s testimony about the sexualized massages that are the very basis of the charges in this case. D. These are not collateral matters. The government’s invocation of Rule 608 and the phrase “collateral issue” miss the mark entirely. As to Rule 608, the testimony of Eva, Michelle, and Kelly is not being offered “to prove specific instances of a witness’s conduct in order to attack or support the witness’s character for DOJ-OGR-00011371