DOJ-OGR-00014266.jpg

be N Ww ws Oo OY ~] oO WO a oO = be N Ww = Hs Oo a OY a ~] a oO a Ke) 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE LCHCmax5 the second address, government. the d Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 160 of 197 2701 it had not been disclosed to the fens conclusion of case, London, addresses is, it's when all of I think what their explanation that she mixed up two properties, and that marginal relevance, if any, of impeachment testimony because ther Ms. Maxwell was living relevant time and dei They can't say Ms. THE COURT: Sure they can. MS. MOE: My point, your Honor, the view is it's easy to mix up two houses, relevance of going properties the Lat given to look into this or respond such a late hour. in London and records at disclosure to So we're now having a Friday afternoon, mini trial about properties de very telling because, i for Ms. Maxwell's deposit at the in this could have been anticipated long ago. fense counsel has said about mixing up t appears to be that tion testimony is shows that extremely value for Kate's doesn't appear to be any dispute that in that area of London during the fFense counsel can't have it both ways. Maxwell easily confused two properties. down this rabbit hole of Everybody does that. is the relevance. lf what's the two different to it. this late stage, It's such a sideshow at especially the government and our inability This could have been teed up much earlier. MR. EVERDELL: I don't know how this could have been considered a sideshow. This shows that what the witness testified to was a factual impossibility. THE COURT: Just like Ms. Maxwell's testimony that she SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212%) 805-0220 DOJ-OGR-00014266