Epstein Secrets

ou. Best, Peter On April 15, 2019 at 7:50:15 PM EDT, wrote: Mr. Skinner, In connection with the grand jury sub oena the "Subpoena") directed to Boies Schiller Flexner LLP ("BSF"), in connection with the case captioned . Maxwell, 15 Civ. 7433 (RWS), in the Southern District of New York, served on February 5, 2019, at

ry sub oena the "Subpoena") directed to Boies Schiller Flexner LLP ("BSF"), in connection with the case captioned . Maxwell, 15 Civ. 7433 (RWS), in the Southern District of New York, served on February 5, 2019, attached please find a sealed order (the "Order") granting permission to BSF to comply with the Subpoena through the pr

via our BSF ShareFile system. Please feel free to contact me should you have any difficulty accessing the materials. Sandra Perkins Case Manager BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP From: Sent: Monday, April 15, 2019 7:49 PM To: Peter Skinner Cc: Si rid McCawlev Sandra Perkins Subject: RE: legal process, regarding In re v.

subpoena (the "Subpoena") directed to Boies Schiller Flexner LLP ("BSF"), in connection with the case captioned v. Maxwell, 15 Civ. 7433 (RWS), in the Southern District of New York, served on February 5, 2019, attached please find a sealed order (the "Order") granting permission to BSF to comply with the Subpoena through the p

utman Sanders LLP 875 Third Avenue New York. New York 10022 troutman.com Bennet J. Moskowitz December 3, 2019 E-MAIL Sigrid S. McCawley, Esq. Boies Schiller Flexner LLP 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1200 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Re: Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein Dear Ms. McCawley: troutmar7 sanders We wr

regarding discovery (e.g., whether discovery is appropriate at this time or the information you requested is discoverable in the actions pending in the Southern District of New York); rather, we respond in order to further the parties' discussions concerning the Program. Accordingly, we repeat your inquiries below and address t

EFTA00029081 --- PAGE BREAK --- Ghislaine Maxwell moves to suppress all evidence the government obtained from a grand jury subpoena it issued to Boies Schiller Flexner LLP and to dismiss Counts Five and Six, which are the fruits of that unlawful subpoena. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT Counts Five and Six a

ed by Boies Schiller in a defamation action it filed against Maxwell on behalf of one of the firm's clients. v. Marvell, Case No. 15-cv-7433 (LAP) (S.D.N.Y). A Protective Order entered in that case prohibited the parties and their lawyers from sharing confidential discovery material (including the two

EFTA00029820 --- PAGE BREAK --- Ghislaine Maxwell moves to suppress all evidence the government obtained from a grand jury subpoena it issued to Boies Schiller Flexner LLP and to dismiss Counts Five and Six, which are the fruits of that unlawful subpoena. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT Counts Five and Six a

ed by Boies Schiller in a defamation action it filed against Maxwell on behalf of one of the firm's clients. v. Marvell, Case No. 15-cv-7433 (LAP) (S.D.N.Y). A Protective Order entered in that case prohibited the parties and their lawyers from sharing confidential discovery material (including the two

ng. The cost: at least $12 million and as much as $25 million. Prosecutors said Avenatti was also recorded at a March 21 meeting with Nike lawyers at Boies Schiller Flexner LLP offering to end the entire matter, with no bad publicity for Nike, for $22.5 million. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031776 --- PAGE BREAK --- If the company didn

ld not "be extorted or hide information" relevant to that probe. The case is U.S. v. Avenatti, case number 19-mj-2927, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031778

orp., 594 F.2d 291 (2d Cir. 1979), and the Fifth Amendment, to suppress all evidence the government obtained from a grand jury subpoena it issued to Boies Schiller Flexner LLP and to dismiss Counts Five and Six, which are the fruits of that unlawful subpoena. Factual Background The facts relevant to this Motion are descr

, who are "not acting at the behest of the police." Id. "Such an analysis is inherently speculative." Id. In fact, unlike every other civil case in the Southern District of New York against Maxwell or Epstein's estate, the government deliberately chose not to intervene in the on-going unsealing process in Giuffre v. Maxwell. In

islaine Maxwell submits this reply in support of her Motion to suppress all evidence the government obtained from a grand jury subpoena it issued to Boies Schiller Flexner LLP and to dismiss Counts Five and Six, which are the fruits of that unlawful subpoena. Introduction and Summary of the Argument If the government mea

on first began. None of these statements by AUSA to Judge McMahon were true. As described above, attorneys pressed the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York to investigate and prosecute Epstein and Maxwell. Ex. J. Then, two months after the meeting with AUSA attorneys told Judge Sweet—who was presiding

islaine Maxwell submits this reply in support of her Motion to suppress all evidence the government obtained from a grand jury subpoena it issued to Boies Schiller Flexner LLP and to dismiss Counts Five and Six, which are the fruits of that unlawful subpoena. Introduction and Summary of the Argument If the government mea

on first began. None of these statements by AUSA to Judge McMahon were true. As described above, attorneys pressed the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York to investigate and prosecute Epstein and Maxwell. Ex. J. Then, two months after the meeting with AUSA attorneys told Judge Sweet—who was presiding