DOJ-OGR-00018110.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 LBUCmaxl made those arguments that very photograph case that we exclude it in don't see that making, it the placement is still problems, too, jury, de fense has made MS. very restricted here. photograph or pause whi the context of bedroom that the def think that probative value is not substan COMEY : full decorations of Document 749 be fore. those 403 problems and th Your Honor, the video le playing it. for those reasons, Filed 08/10/22 then it for those same reasons. Page 9 of 236 Tf the Court already excluded "s got to be the t and the argument the government is I think the prejudice will relevanc that mean that this should not be seen by the regardless where it's placed or what arguments the be I do not intend to linger over th It will the area aro Fendant shared with Je just show the und the master rey Epstein. tially outweighed by unfair prejudice, particularly when it is in the context of the video showing th ntire decorations. THE COURT: I'm overruling the objection. I think the context is different than the photo in isolation. You'll propose a limiting instruction along the line of what you've indicated. MS. COMEY: Yes, your Honor. THE COURT: It is consistent with testimony regarding photographs of that. It strikes me as di that's come in and the context naked people in the h ouse, it's corroborative of he evidence So I will Fferent in light of t in which it is. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 913 DOJ-OGR-00018110