DOJ-OGR-00012882.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 LC6VMAX4 MR. ROHR fore the jury c Al BACH: Frer conti Document 751 omes in. Filed 08/10/22 One matter to take up, Ferring with the def make sure we about one piece o search. The government's understanding of is that the government is not going to of depict either images ot semi-nude peopl testimony categories of those were consistent with -- both of images. fully understood the Court's ruling fF celebrities or images of nse we just the Cour Page 131 of 261 fer exhibit inside the house; would be consistent with THE COUR what she saw at On the celebrity piece, weren't moving in Epstein wi th celebri T: You can ask that exhibit; ties. Was MR. ROHRI tha BACH: No, THE COUR is may you ask MR. ROHR going to just ask at a relatively high level of both photos she saw and the nude artwor SOUTHERN D the witness about T: I didn't rule on that, BACH: Yes. from the witness that she observed those We just want t 1s correct, but it is going LS EO 1292 your Honor, wanted to this morning f the testimony related to the New York t's ruling that nude or elicit CWO the Court's ruling. the relevant time period. t photos she saw? STR CT R G iPORT BRS, Pes (212) 805-0300 to make sure that those pieces of that is a desk with photos of generality, both of testimony the witness testimony about IT understood you to say you that a misunderstanding? your Honor. but your question So my understanding is we're but k she observed. DOJ-OGR-00012882