DOJ-OGR-00007128.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 Document 465 Filed 11/15/21 Page 77 of 127 LB1TMAX3 irrelevant to the crimes charged, correct? Under the age of is what is legally relevant. MS. MOE: That's certainly true with respect to the elements as to the other victims, but I think as a matter of common sense, a jury understanding that the defendant is willing to provide Epstein with a girl at the age of 17 would certainly speak to her knowledge of his sexual preferences. THE COURT: Why doesn't it speak to a knowledge of sexual preferences to someone just above the age of consent? MS. MOE: Gl Well, your Honor, I think the close proximity of ages, it speaks to her knowledge about his preference for very young girls. I would also note that, although the age of 17 is relevant with respect to the Mann Act counts, with respect to the trafficking counts, the applicable age is there is 18. 77 17 THE COURT: I began this whole series by asking, like eight times and very clearly, is there any sense in which this individual, the conduct that's -- assuming it to all be true with respect to this individual, could establish an element of any of the crimes charged? MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. With respect to that victim, that's certainly the case. But speaking to direct evidence of knowledge and preferences, it's certainly also direct evidence of the defendant's knowledge with respect to the sex trafficking counts where the age of consent there is SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00007128