DOJ-OGR-00000541.jpg

Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 36 =~ Filed 07/24/19 Page 31 of 74 31 1 risk, that would suffice. 2 MR. WEINBERG: think I have to bear the burden of 5 rebutting the presumption as to each prong, although I think 4 once rebutting the burden falls on the government, and then 5 they have different substantive burdens of proof. 6 So danger. There are two categories of the dangers 7 that have been identified by the government. Number one is 8 simply the danger of recidivism which is the classic danger 9 that results in detention when detention is predicated on 10 danger. 11 And Congress was very clear that they because th 12 danger prong is predictive. It is not just was he a bad guy. 13 Did he do things in the past. That's what a trial is for. 14 That's what legal issues are for. It's can we infer from the 15 past that he is a future danger and can we do it by clear and 16 convincing evidence. 17 In terms of rebutting and the burden of production as 18 to that part of the danger prong, 14 years, since 2005 until 19 2019. And the government, despite a website, despite their 20 enormous ability to investigate -- and they've been 21 investigating for months -- there is no allegation that 22 Mr. Epstein, after 2005, engaged in illegal sexual activity 23 with a minor. 24 Again, I'm not diminishing the gravity of the 25 allegations in 2005 and 2004, but once he knew that he was SOUTHERN DISTR CT R G (212) ‘PORTERS, P. 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00000541