I'm going to guess, from what I have read that quite often the perps would drug, to some degree, or offer drugs to the victims (illegal substances, alcohol, etc.) so that in the event that a possible future prosecution ever happened, they would try to use expert testimony to say that the victims testimony was unreliable.
I'm gathering that from considering WHOM they are trying to use as expert witnesses. It's gonna be ugly. The prosecution seems to be doing a fairly good job at responses to the motions.
I think a big thing will be made of hearsay and exceptions to hearsay rules. Especially in children, there are exceptions to hearsay rules admissible as evidence. That would take a long post to go into, but I do know that the defense side knows it is in a precarious position and can best hope to keep conviction counts to a minimum at best.
Borrowing this quote from @sonofenos
"The fact that Ghislaine's Submarine is being discussed on the news shows that things have changed. Just wait till the normies learn that Disney Cruise Ships had a routine underwater child delivery stop to Epstein's docking bay."
And, of course, the connection to the Clinton Foundation
