22a procedural error is found when a district court “fails to calculate (or improperly calculates) the Sentencing Guidelines range, treats the Sentencing Guidelines as mandatory, fails to consider the [Section] 3553(a) factors, selects a sentence based on clearly erroneous facts, or fails adequately to explain the chosen sentence.” The District Court did none of that. It is important to emphasize that the Sentencing Guidelines “are guidelines—that is, they are truly advisory.”* A District Court is “generally free to impose sentences outside the recommended range” based on its own “informed and individualized judgment.” With respect to the four-level leadership enhancement, the District Court found that Maxwell “supervised” Sarah Kellen in part because of testimony from two of Epstein’s pilots who testified that Kellen was Maxwell’s assistant. The District Court found that testimony credible, in part because it was corroborated by other testimony that Maxwell was Epstein’s “number two and the lady of the house” in Palm Beach, where much of the abuse occurred and where Kellen worked. We therefore hold that the District Court did not err in applying the leadership enhancement. With respect to the length of the sentence, the District Court properly discussed the sentencing factors when imposing the sentence, and described, at length, Maxwell’s “pivotal role in facilitating the abuse of the underaged girls through a series of deceptive 53 United States v. Robinson, 702 F.3d 22, 38 (2d Cir. 2012). 54 Cavera, 550 F.3d at 189. 55 Td. 56 A-417, DOJ-OGR-00000085