3
Shared Docs
0
Same-Page
6 / 3
Mentions
1 FACTUAL BACKGROUND 2 A. The Protective Order in v. Maxwell 2 B. Maxwell's April and July 2016 depositions 4 C. The Settlement And Boies Schiller's Refusal To Comply With The Protective Order 6 D. The Government's False Statements To Judge McMahon 6 E. Judge Netburn Separately Rejects An
Page: EFTA00011453 →law firm had provided that information well before the investigation began. The government did indeed have previous contact with the firm. And Pomp Schiller was instrumental in fomenting the Maxwell prosecution. The record is surpassingly clear: But for the government's misrepresentation, witting or not
Page: EFTA00011458 →a civil case from disclosing confidential documents to others. 154 F.R.D. at 92-93. Despite this prohibition, counsel for the defendant approached the Manhattan District Attorney's Office and suggested that it had evidence of criminal violations relating to the case. Id. at 93. A grand jury issued a subpoena, and the defendant produc
Page: EFTA00011469 →McMahon that the prosecutors had no idea what was in Boies Schiller's file. Indeed, he insisted, there had been no contact whatsoever between Boies Schiller and United States Attorney's Office before the government commenced its investigation. Nor, said the prosecutor, did Boies Schiller have any role in
Page: EFTA00029082 →aw firm had provided that information well before the investigation began. The government did indeed have previous contact with the firm. And Boies Schiller was instrumental in fomenting the Maxwell prosecution. The record is surpassingly clear: But for the government's misrepresentation, witting or not
Page: EFTA00029083 →a civil case from disclosing confidential documents to others. 154 F.R.D. at 92-93. Despite this prohibition, counsel for the defendant approached the Manhattan District Attorney's Office and suggested that it had evidence of criminal violations relating to the case. Id. at 93. A grand jury issued a subpoena, and the defendant produc
Page: EFTA00029094 →1 FACTUAL BACKGROUND 2 A. The Protective Order in v. Maxwell 2 B. Maxwell's April and July 2016 depositions 4 C. The Settlement And Boies Schiller's Refusal To Comply With The Protective Order 6 D. The Government's False Statements To Judge McMahon 6 E. Judge Netburn Separately Rejects An
Page: EFTA00029817 →stify the government's secret, ex parte application . Ex. H, p 6. Judge Netburn also implicitly recognized what Judge McMahon never knew—that Boies Schiller was all too eager for the government to investigate and prosecute Maxwell: 6 Maxwell has not yet been provided discovery of whether Boies Schiller s
Page: EFTA00029830 →a civil case from disclosing confidential documents to others. 154 F.R.D. at 92-93. Despite this prohibition, counsel for the defendant approached the Manhattan District Attorney's Office and suggested that it had evidence of criminal violations relating to the case. Id. at 93. A grand jury issued a subpoena, and the defendant produc
Page: EFTA00029833 →Entities connected to both Schiller and the Manhattan District Attorney's Office

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
David Boies
PERSON
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON
Julie K. Brown
PERSONJane Doe
PERSON
Stephen Hawking
PERSONSecond Circuit
ORGANIZATIONColleen McMahon
PERSONJeffrey Pagliuca
PERSON
Prince Andrew
PERSON
Boies Schiller
ORGANIZATIONMartindell
PERSON
Michael Cohen
PERSONStephen Rex Brown
PERSON
Boies Schiller Flexner LLP
ORGANIZATIONChemical Bank
ORGANIZATION
Valentine
PERSON
United States
LOCATIONMartin Weinberg
PERSON
Boles
PERSON