1. Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) permits the
government, in a prosecution for accessing child
pornography with intent to view, to introduce evidence
of lawful sexual paraphernalia ("anatomical models")
and argue that the items show a sexual interest in
children and therefore the defendant knowingly accessed
the charged material -- where the inference functions
as character/propensity proof.

2. Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 403 requires exclusion
of inflammatory "sexual interest" evidence offered as
"motive" or "absense of mistake" in a child pornography
case when the evidence 's probative value is modest, the
risk of moral condemnation is extreme, and limiting
instructions cannot realistically prevent jurors from
using the evidence as proof of bad character.

Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) permits introduction of evidence of lawful sexual paraphernalia to prove a defendant's propensity to access child pornography, and whether Federal Rule of Evidence 403 requires exclusion of inflammatory sexual-interest evidence when its probative value is modest and risk of moral condemnation is extreme