Courtroom filing references expert testimony and motion in limine without substantive new allegations

10 id. 12 13 14 L5 16 ne) 18 life) 20 21 22 23 24 25 78 H3VOGIU1 to pick apart nuances in the statement. So, your Honor, I submit that to you for what it doesn't say from Ms. Maxwell since they've provided that to you today. There are a few more things that I just want to touch on that I think need to be clarified, and that is, with respect to -- there was this mention about newspaper articles, and as you know we've submitted an expert who analyzed through his web analytics, he's the sam xpert that was in the Anders case who followed that video of the Fox reporter over the internet and tracked that he uses a well-accepted methodology. We've set that forth all in our papers. But he tracked the specific quoted statements, your Honor. And if they have an issue, if they want to say, oh, they're proposing today that these articles related to the Dershowitz matter, that's subject for cross examination of him if they want, but he has a very clear methodology, and those articles that he tracked were in that manner, your Honor, so I just want to make that point since they raised it. I know we're not discussing the experts in detail today, but I did ask that question. So your Honor, in just summarizing on those points, I think we made clear in our opening argument why we believe that this shouldn't be subject to a number of mini trials ona variety of these issues, we're hoping to streamline this matter, and that's why we proposed this motion in limine to you SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011381