DOJ-OGR-00018531.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 LC6VMAX6 MS. MOE: to why w Vv and Kate, Yes, Document 751 your Honor. Filed 08/10/22 And decided not to do that in this case, Since this has come up now twice. explain why we've approached this this way. Page 194 of 261 1355 I'd be happy to speak both for Jane I'd be happy to Because we tried to be sensitive in the way we've approached our interviews with victims in this cas We' do the defense has put memories; and so it V in issue th is importan we have not shown the victims —- THE COURT: strategic decision and an understandable one. excuse a lack of certainl t that [ ge 1a e t this quality of in terms of for two reasons. One, the victims' corroboration that That is absolutely a Foundation as to relevancy. y understand why you'd make that choice, imagine other reasons you'd make the choice. I don't thi way helps determine 2019 pictures of highly movable objects, nk -—- tell me if match up with the sp from the Court's perspectiv It does not then It just doesn't. and I can I'm wrong -- that in any whether thes whi ecific testimony of the ch may or may not witness, are relevant to a conspiracy that ended 15 years earlier. MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. And I think our argument on that is that this is an issue of weight and not relevanc Because the argument before the jury from this evidence is not that these are th schoolgirl outfits or one of the schoolgirl outfits that Kate was asked to wear. The point is that Kate told the jury that SOUTH ERN D STR CT RE PORT ERS, (212) 80 5-0300 PG ew DOJ-OGR-00018531