DOJ-OGR-00007085.jpg

be N Ww ws Oo OY ~] oO WO Ww a OY 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE LBI5SMAX2 However, would be to even if to talk about wh permit the det ther the def Document 465 their sex tra icking. de fense from cross-exa The remedy would not mining law ent hearsay sta would be ext through law individuals to assess whether or not tements tha tremely con fusing this became an issue at fFense to call Filed 11/15/21 t the trial, these relevant Page 34 of 127 34 the remedy witnesses ndant was or was not involved in Forcement be to permit agents about enforcement implicated the def de fendant. those witnesses And so, agents, determin those lines, the pot the s themselves and, of ntial relevance, if and so the government the government submits that this could come in at trial would be if course, it tLatements of t other individuals provided to them. It for the jury to be hearing, these those individuals ndant or simply said nothing about the that the only way the defense called is diff icult to any, of respectful testimony along ly submi ts that none of this should be offered at trial unless and until there is an offer of proof along those lines. THE COURT: Ms. Menninger? MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, whether someone said no one else involved or didn't implicate our client is not hearsay, it is the absence of a statement. So I don't understand the government's position that if an investigator -- THE COURT: It is not the absence of the statement, right? F you are trying to put in an out-of-court statement from someone who said that Ms. Maxwell wasn't involved, it is SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212%) 805-0220 DOJ-OGR-00007085