HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011305

id.

ne)

life)

H3VOGIU1

(Case called)

THI

COURT: Like all of you, you woke up in the middle

of the night thinking about this case. I would like to see if

I can clarify my understanding.

In the motion to dismiss, I concluded, I think, that

what was at issue was the truth or falsity of the plaintiff's

allegations concerning sexual abuse and the activities of the

defendant. I think that's my sense of my own opinion. Yesterday, we were discussing the redactions of the

intervention motion. I got the sense, perhaps wrongly, that

the plaintiff's position was that the defamation was the truth

or falsity of the statements relating to the defendant. Period. Am I correct?

MS. McCAWLEY: You are, your Honor, in that the

statements about the defendant to be clear, because one of

the allegations is, of course, she was a madam and a

coconspirator with Epstein -- do involve Epstein.

aid al

ir]

COURT: Listen. Leave the pejorative out. Okay? Please.

MS. McCAWLEY: Sure.

THI

COURT: Simply because I'm trying to come to grips, obviously, with the scope of this case, which is a real

issue, obviously. So is it you are restricting your claim to

the truth and falsity of the statements about Maxwell?

MS. McCAWLEY: Yes, that is the case, your Honor. The

SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011305