22 H3VOGIU1 ih probative value is outweighed by the prejudice. Again, this is 2 only seeking damages based on defendant's defamation. 3 I'm going to move on to point number 9. Ms. Giuffre 4 seeks to exclude any alleged criminal history from coming into 5 this case. And the Federal Rules of Evidence bar the 6 introduction of this evidence, full stop. 7 As the Court is aware, the only way criminal history 8 could come into evidence is through Rule 609, but that rule 9 itself bars this evidence because, one, there's no conviction, 10 and two, the alleged crime does not go to truthfulness. 1a Of the two parties, your Honor, Ms. Giuffre is the 12 only one who has not been convicted of a crime here, this is 13 merely an alleged prior bad act which is excluded under Rule 14 404. 15 And this alleged act, which Ms. Giuffre denies, does 16 not go to truthfulness, and that's an important point here. An de accusation of a crime with no conviction does not go to 18 truthfulness, especially a crime like this, which specifically 19 is defendant says she stole from a tip jar when she was a 20 teenager. Knowing that this type of evidence is excluded, 21 counsel for defendant has put forth an unsupported argument 22 that Ms. Giuffre left the United States because of allegations 23 that she stole from a tip jar. That is, of course, false. She 24 left the United States to get away from defendant's abuse. 25 And moreover, the documentary evidence in this case, SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011325