DOJ-OGR-00011535.jpg

be NO Ww ws Oo OY ~] oO Ke) a oO he be No (ee) = Hs Oo _ OY a ~] a oO a Ke} 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 737 Filed 07/22/22 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-00011535