EFTA00083828

j782epsC kjc 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
MR. WEINGARTEN: The last thing we did today was 
refuse to answer questions. What we said at Pretrial is heaven 
forbid we make a mistake, and in terms of assets, we wanted to 
be precise. So there was no refusal. There was a request for 
time to supplement. That was accepted. And that's part of the 
reason we want to sit down and make sure we get our information 
correct to provide to the court. 
THE COURT: All right. 
MR. WEINGARTEN: Can I make one other point? 
THE COURT: Sure. 
MR. WEINGARTEN: In terms of the obstruction, I think 
it is such a significant part of our argument that the conduct 
at issue is ancient. It is from 2002 to 2005. So obviously if 
the defendant is a threat to obstruct justice, the court needs 
to take that into account. The allegations raised -- and I 
just read them briefly because we just got the government's 
letter -- relate to negotiations between the feds and the 
defendant. Back when the Southern District of Florida was 
attempting to find an appropriate remedy, there were 
discussions going back and forth: Can we squeeze you into this 
statute? And it didn't work, and it didn't work because there 
is no factual basis. That is the reference to the alleged 
obstruction. Not obstructive acts. Instead, the feds in 
Florida agreed to the plea to the state offense because there 
was no appropriate statute that covered conduct that was 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. 
EFTA00083848

22 
j782epsC kjc 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
proveable. That is the answer to the obstruction issue. 
THE COURT: All right. So you want to adjourn the 
detention hearing until Thursday? 
MR. WEINGARTEN: Yes. 
THE COURT: All right. Is there any objection to that 
from the government? I think under the statute he is entitled 
to three days. 
MR. 
: That is, of course, fine, your Honor. 
I think we would like just a very brief opportunity to 
respond to some of those arguments so that they don't sort of 
hang with the court for three days unresponded to. 
THE COURT: All right. Go ahead. 
MR. 
: Just very briefly, your Honor, I 
think a lot of that discussion was entirely orthogonal to the 
issues here. 
But just very briefly, with respect to the charges 
here, there is simply no force required for underage victims. 
A grand jury has properly returned an indictment, and these are 
fact issues that are being presented in large part. 
Certainly the concept of child prostitution is, 
frankly, offensive and not recognized in federal law. The idea 
that children can consent to sex and be prostitutes is beyond 
the realm of federal law which contemplates trafficking, which 
is what has been charged here. Mr. Weingarten is free to argue 
to a jury that trafficking minors was only statutory rape or 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. 
EFTA00083849

23 
j782epsC kjc 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
that those victims weren't treated as badly as the parade of 
horribles he has in mind. But for now the question is whether 
the defendant's attendance can be assured. 
And with respect to the nonprosecution agreement 
THE COURT: I'm not sure I would refer to something as 
only statutory rape. The use of the word "only" before 
"statutory rape" I'm not sure sits well. But go ahead. 
MR. 
: And I agree, your Honor. 
With respect to the actual substance, the Southern 
District of Florida has represented in public filings that the 
nonprosecution agreement was limited to the Southern District 
of Florida, and we can litigate that in a motion to dismiss, 
but it is simply not relevant here. 
With respect to the statute of limitations, 
Mr. Weingarten says that the conduct is old. He did not say 
that that it is beyond the statute of limitations because it is 
not. 
And, finally, it is not the same conduct. Some of the 
conduct overlaps. Some of the conduct does not. And in 
particular, one of the two counts of the indictment is 
predicated exclusively on New York victims. 
So for all of those reasons, we just ask the court to 
consider those responses as it awaits the defendant's filings 
later this week. 
MR. WEINGARTEN: Can I just make one point to clarify? 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. 
EFTA00083850

L^ 
j782epsC kjc 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
THE COURT: Go ahead. 
MR. WEINGARTEN: On the statutory rape thing, I had t 
senior moment. There is no statutory rape because there is no 
penetration, and that is the answer to that question. 
THE COURT: All right. 
We will set this down for a detention hearing on 
Thursday, July 11, for the continuation of the detention 
hearing. Thursday, July 11, at 2 p.m. 
The defendant is detained at least until the 
continuation of the detention hearing pursuant to 18 United 
States Code 3142(f). 
I have been advised by Judge Berman that he wants to 
see counsel right after these proceedings. Judge Berman's 
courtroom is 17B. So counsel and Mr. Epstein should go to 178. 
All right. Anything else from the government? 
MR. 
: 
Your Honor, ordinarily we would ask 
to exclude speedy trial time, but I think because we are going 
directly to Judge Berman, we have no such application. 
THE COURT: Mr. Weingarten, anything else? 
MR. WEINGARTEN: No, thank you, your Honor. 
THE COURT: Mr. Weingarten, anything else? 
MR. WEINGARTEN: No, your Honor. 
THE COURT: All right. Thank you all. 
oOo 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. 
EFTA00083851