HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011422

id.

ne)

life)

119 H3vlgiu2

eventually Ms. Maxwell says, you know, I'm not really sure what

he went to jail for. It had something to do with, she

thinks -- Ms. Maxwell teenage prostitution or under-age

prostitution or something like that. That certainly doesn't

give you the ability then to ram in 400 pages of uncorroborated

hearsay under the idea that somehow this is notice to somebody. And I think there is one other factual claim that they make about, you know, what Ms. Maxwell should have known, which

is not the standard. It is not incumbent upon an individual

defendant to go investigate things. That's not the standard.

It seems to me that they have conceded that these

documents are hearsay because they're saying, we're not

offering them for the truth of the matter asserted; we want to

offer it for this knowledge theory that we have.

So I've briefed the issue about business records,

which they are not. I've briefed the issue about government police records, which they are police records, but essentially the same tests for business records applies to police records, which is, you have to be under a business duty to record the

information, and court after court after court after court,

across the country, has said, people in police reports, like

witnesses, are not under a business duty as part of the police department. So all of those statements, the second- and

thirdhand hearsay statements, are inadmissible, either as

government records or police records or whatever you want to

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

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011422