DOJ-OGR-00016980.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page 54 of 95 2792 I think, understanding the Court's logic to be that the testimony of That's my understanding of fine and the jury can her ag [ think preserving the earlier far as the suggestion to from make So that is our objection to understanding that objection about resolve the this clause, its own Annie's age and how it relates to [ understand the broader suggestion, but this third overt act would Maxwell provided Annie with an guess to clarify, and the government would be fine Judge, I'm Annie about the topless massage can be considered by the jury the conspiracy to violate New York law. And understanding that's the then we would -—- but We preserve our objection LCI1MAX1 1 not the violation of New York law. 2 that. 3 MR. ROHRBACH: Well, 4 Mr. Everdell is 5 Annie's testimony, as 6 redacting issue is just to remov 7 think that would be 8 conclusions about, you know, y) the offense. 10 THE COURT: 11 in light of my earlier conclusion, 12 read, "In or about 1996, 13 unsolicited massage in New Mexico." 14 MR. ROHRBACH: 15 Mr. Everdell's suggestion, 16 with that. 17 MR. EVERDELL: And I 18 19 20 as evidence of 21 THE COURT: That's right. 22 MR. EVERDELL: Okay. 23 Court's Logic and ruling, 24 like the redaction. 25 but -- yes. SOUTH ERN D STR CT REPORT ERS, (212) 805-0300 then we would from before, PG ew DOJ-OGR-00016980