DOJ-OGR-00013210.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 753 Filed 08/10/22 Page 197 of 264 LC7Cmax6 Carolyn - cross 1 factual inconsistency. 2 MR. PAGLIUCA: Well, your Honor, there are two 3 principals at play here. 4 The first is this is what is commonly referred to as 5 impeachment by omission, which is a subset of impeachment by 6 contradiction. Impeachment by omission typically occurs where 7 there is a document or a statement where the witness would 8 likely include whatever is omitted, and this is such a 9 document, and I am seeking to impeach by omission through this 10 document. This is a complaint against two people that this 11 witness claims sexually abused her. It's not only against 12 Epstein, it's against one of Epstein's employees who is 13 highlighted in this complaint. Th ntire testimony by the 14 government here through this witness has downplayed the role of 15 Sarah Kellen and up-played the role of Ghislaine Maxwell, and 16 it is an impeachment by omission that, in 2008, shortly after 17 being interviewed by the FBI about the same subject matter with 18 counsel, there is no mention of Maxwell in this entire 19 complaint. I think that is significant under the facts of this 20 case. So, I think it is admissible under that theory and there ZA is ample federal law, First Circuit, this circuit, that 22 supports that theory of impeachment by omission. And these 23 factual paragraphs, I believe, are also impeaching of the 24 witness's testimony because it is inconsistent with the things 25 that she has claimed happened to her in addition to these SOUTH ERN D STR CT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 1638 DOJ-OGR-00013210