HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011305.jpg

10 fd. 12 [3 14 15 16 i) 18 wife) 20 21 22 23 24 25 H3VOGIU1 (Case called) THI |e COURT: Like all of you, you woke up in the middle of the night thinking about this case. I would like to see if I can clarify my understanding. In the motion to dismiss, I concluded, I think, that what was at issue was the truth or falsity of the plaintiff's allegations concerning sexual abuse and the activities of the defendant. I think that's my sense of my own opinion. Yesterday, we were discussing the redactions of the intervention motion. I got the sense, perhaps wrongly, that the plaintiff's position was that the defamation was the truth or falsity of the statements relating to the defendant. Period. Am I correct? MS. McCAWLEY: You are, your Honor, in that the statements about the defendant to be clear, because one of the allegations is, of course, she was a madam and a coconspirator with Epstein -- do involve Epstein. aid cl [ra] COURT: Listen. Leave the pejorative out. Okay? Please. MS. McCAWLEY: Sure. TH Cl COURT: Simply because I'm trying to come to grips, obviously, with the scope of this case, which is a real issue, obviously. So is it you are restricting your claim to the truth and falsity of the statements about Maxwell? MS. McCAWLEY: Yes, that is the case, your Honor. The SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011305