DOJ-OGR-00000542.jpg

be No Ww ws oO OY ~] oO Ke} 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document36_ Filed 07/24/19 Page 32 of 74 a2 being investigated, he wasn't a predator that couldn't control his conduct. He disciplined himself. There has been no allegation since the commencement of that investigation that Mr. Epstein again endangered a minor. Putting aside consent, there is just no allegation. The witnesses that Mr. Rossmiller will offer to the Court in the future, at least to the extent that they've been characterized by the government, are more witnesses with a kind of a parallel group of witnesses to the 2002 and '05 allegations. So I think a 14-year gap is an eloquent rebuttal to a burden of production presumption as to danger. THE COURT: So I have a question about that too because I'm not so sure. I don't purport to know, but I'm not so sure. So in your letter to the Court -- I think it's at page 6 --— is one of a series of strong statements. This one in particular says: "Any danger that Mr. Epstein may have once posed to the community has long since abated." Another sentence used the word "evaporates," but let's say "abated." The defense submission goes on to say: "At the very least, this enormous gap in time precludes a finding," "orecludes a finding by clear and convincing evidence that no conditions of release can reasonably assure the community's safety." Right? That's your position as a matter of law. You SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00000542