DOJ-OGR-00009605.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 621 Filed 02/25/22 Page 43 of 51
one example, the defendant claims that Carolyn's trial testimony that the defendant called her to
set up massage appointments "could have been disproven with contemporaneous phone records."
(Def. Mot. at 28) (emphasis added). The defendant's claim is entirely speculative; she makes no
claim about what Carolyn's phone records, or those of her mother or then-boyfriend, would have
shown, and she ignores that the records may well have helped the Government, not her, if they
were available.
As another example, the defendant argues that had the flight manifests been available for
the time period charged in the Indictment, 10 she "could have used them to challenge whether Jane
was on those flights as well as the accuracy of Jane's recollection of events." (Id. at 26). The
defendant does not establish how the flight manifests would have helped her. She claims that she
needed the flight manifests because the flight logs are incomplete. (Id.). In so arguing, the
defendant assumes that the flight manifests were complete¹¹ and contained information that would
10 The defendant baldly argues that the flight manifests "did not go back to the time period charged
in the Indictment" "[b]ecause of the passage of time." (Def. Mot. at 26). However, at trial, Visoski
testified that between approximately 1994 and 2004, he would drop off the passenger manifests he
personally completed at Epstein's main office in New York. (Tr. 172). Similarly, Rodgers
testified that he turned over the passenger manifests that he completed to one of Epstein's
attorneys. (Tr. 1819). The defendant has not established that such manifests were not available
due to any intentionally manufactured delay. See United States v. Dornau, 356 F. Supp. 1091,
1094 (S.D.N.Y. 1973) ("The fact that evidence may be lost or destroyed during the pre-indictment
stage is inherent in any delay, no matter what the duration. Furthermore, there has been no
allegation in this case that the destruction of the records was deliberate on the part of either the
government or trustee.").
11 The defendant complains that the flight logs kept by Rodgers "were incomplete and often
identified passengers simply by their first names or generic identifiers like '1 female' or '1 male'"
in her efforts to argue that the unavailability of the passenger manifests was material. (Id.). The
defendant ignores Visoski's testimony that when completing the manifest, he "tried to be as
accurate as [he] could," but that if he "didn't know a passenger name, [he] wanted to put whether
42
DOJ-OGR-00009605