Epstein Secrets

ALLEN,JOSEPH FISHER,MARJORIE S SCHELLER,DR ZBIGNIEW PAGLIARI,RICHARD A KIER

CES AT SLOAN CURVE,THE PELTZ,NELSON TAYLOR,TERRY R CLARIDGES CONDO INC,THE ROY

n this in more detail. Maxwell Pre-Trial Mot. Nos. 4 8c 5. But the point is this: The defamation case should have been extremely narrow, but Boies Schiller transformed it into something much broader—a proxy prosecution of Epstein and Maxwell for allegedly trafficking and abusing Giuffre, which then comp

1988) 12 United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) 10 United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) 5, 6, 7 United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) 12 US Bank Nat. Ass 'n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) 2

d charged with third-degree felony terroristic threat." Porter asked, "I'd like to know if he has any bomb-making ability." KTRK-TV Houston (8/13, Schiller, 431K) reports Fonseca "is facing a felony charge after police say he made a terroristic threat on Snapchat." KPRC-TV Houston (8/13, McCord, Arche

gham Palace stating, 'Any suggestion of impropriety with minors is categorically untrue.' The Prince denied this before." The Washington Post (8/13, Taylor, Adam, 14.2M) reports, "Andrew, the brother of Prince Charles and eighth in line to the British throne, has denied having any sexual relations with

011o hj Email: 1 6 3 823 Schiatti, Gianmarco a r p 71841712w(?) rig i 121 RI) Schiffer, Helen & Tim 784 Parx Ave NYC 646 226 4696 Hen+len P Schiller P 516 537 7744 2nd home Sebag Montefiroe Simon & Santa 838N831-1911 Seilern Christine 302/15c W12th St NYt h) 881 W) Sejoumet, Isabel de

58- 1 w 001 001 Tavoulareas, Mr Billy & Nicket venue ondon N 3/1;1 wr 6 4LP Tavoulareas, Peter 7 Prince Albert Road 04 385 207;04Ni ii1 (w) Taylor, Emmy R11 4471Z 545961V4(1.12ura SiS I gr e 85,04 84 .(hrai n mail: erntawa attnet :111)17 L el Ave Veal Holtoj o CA 90046 001 5ly 373'-‘810(

n this in more detail. Maxwell Pre-Trial Mot. Nos. 4 8c 5. But the point is this: The defamation case should have been extremely narrow, but Boies Schiller transformed it into something much broader—a proxy prosecution of Epstein and Maxwell for allegedly trafficking and abusing which then compelled Ma

1988) 12 United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) 10 United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) 5, 6, 7 United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) 12 US Bank Nat. Ass 'n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) 2

n this in more detail. Maxwell Pre-Trial Mot. Nos. 4 8c 5. But the point is this: The defamation case should have been extremely narrow, but Boies Schiller transformed it into something much broader—a proxy prosecution of Epstein and Maxwell for allegedly trafficking and abusing which then compelled Ma

1988) 12 United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) 10 United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) 5, 6, 7 United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) 12 US Bank Nat. Ass 'n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) 2

r 18, 2018. Shortly thereafter, in or about December or January 2018, the Government indicated to at I that it intended to make document requests. Schiller generally advised the Government that a protective order would govern some of the materials. (Id. at 3). In or about February 2019, approximately t

75 Smith y. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) 117, 118 Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607 (2003) 45 Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 (1965) 300 Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522 (1975) 299,300 Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) 56 Thom v. Ashcroft, 369 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2004) 47 T

bpoenas and Ex Pane Applications for Materials SOW- after opening t mment identified possible victims and their counsel trroiigh ich ina Boies Schiller. (Def. Mem. 3, Ex. E at 2-3). SDNY first cont oies Schiller about its investigation on or about December 18, 2018. Shortly thereafter, in oar Dec

8, 81 Smith v. Maiyland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) 83, 84 Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607 (2003) 34 Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 (1965) 208 Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522 (1975) 206, 208 Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) 40 Thom v. Ashcroft, 369 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2004) 35

yl (Eco Crime) Santamaria, Michelle (HOM) Satcher, Linda (Appeals) Satcher, Lisa (Fel U) Sauvola, Nicole (Belie Glade) Scharaga, Joan (CAC) Schiller, Gregory (Juv Intake) Seder, Sandra Mall Rm) Selvig, Kenneth (INTAKE) Shepherd, Caroline (CC) Shepherd, Robed Juv Intake) Shepherd, Tonya (I

(COMBAT) Ullman*, Nicolina (CC M) Stamey-Eddins, Pate (CC) Stephens, Farah (INTAKE) Stocked, Eileen (CAC-Juv) Taketani, Sachiko (Juv Intake) Taylor, Jake (JAC) Taylor, Lorene (INVEST) Telisman, An (CC B) Toner, Elizabeth JUVENILE) Tetreault, Wendy Juv Intake) Thomas, Bully Int Res) Thom

1988) 12 United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) 10 United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) 5, 6, 7 United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) 12 US Bank Nat. Ass 'n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) 2

n this in more detail. Maxwell Pre-Trial Mot. Nos. 4 8c 5. But the point is this: The defamation case should have been extremely narrow, but Boies Schiller transformed it into something much broader—a proxy prosecution of Epstein and Maxwell for allegedly trafficking and abusing Giuffre, which then comp

not actively investigating her. That understanding, as it turned out, was incorrect, but it was a misunderstanding deliberately encouraged by Boies Schiller with cooperation from the government. If Boies Schiller had disclosed that material Judge Sweet ordered them to disclose, Maxwell would have invoked