DOJ-OGR-00007413.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 491 Filed 11/22/21 Page2of6 identification.” Jd. (internal quotation marks omitted); see Fed. R. Evid. 901(a). The “standard for authentication is one of ‘reasonable likelihood’ and is ‘minimal.’ The testimony of a witness with knowledge that a matter is what it is claimed to be is sufficient to satisfy this standard.” United States v. Gagliardi, 506 F.3d 140, 151 (2d Cir. 2007) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). After this low bar is satisfied, “the other party then remains free to challenge the reliability of the evidence, to minimize its importance, or to argue alternative interpretations of its meaning, but these and similar other challenges to go the weight of the evidence—not to its admissibility.” United States v. Tan Yat Chin, 371 F.3d 31, 38 (2d Cir. 2004) (emphases in original). The defendant’s argument suggests that Government Exhibit 52 is unique in a way unsupported by the evidence. Government Exhibit 52 is a bound, sewn, typed address book with a particular cover. Employee-1 will testify that, based on its appearance, contents, and distinctive characteristics, it appears to be a copy of the defendant’s address book. She will also testify that other bound, sewn, typed copies of the same address book with the same cover were located in specific places in Epstein’s Palm Beach house, as was the operating practice of Epstein’s house. That testimony is corroborated by Government Exhibit 606, the household manual, which states that “A copy of Mr Epstein and Ms Maxwell’s telephone directories must be placed to the right of each telephone (except for the Guestrooms).” (GX 606 at 7). And it is corroborated by Mr. Rodriguez himself, whose counsel said at sentencing in his case that the book he possessed was “a copy of the book, of which there were many copies, and Mr. Rodriguez had one as Mr. Epstein’s house man.” Sent. Tr. at 10, United States v. Rodriguez, 10 Cr. 80015 (KAM) (S.D.F.L. June 18, DOJ-OGR-00007413