Epstein Secrets

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x 20 Cr. 330 (MN) REPLY MEMORANDUM OF GHISLAINE MAXWELL IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION UNDER THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE TO SUPPRESS A

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x 20 Cr. 330 (MN) REPLY MEMORANDUM OF GHISLAINE MAXWELL IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION UNDER THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE TO SUPPRESS ALL EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE GOVERNMENT'S SUBPOENA TO BOLES SCHILLER AND TO DI

. United States, 481 U.S. 787 (1987) 24 Other Authorities Stephen Rex Brown, Manhattan federal prosecutors declined to pursue Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell case in 2016, New York Daily News (Oct. 13, 2020) 11 U.S. Dept. of Justice, JUSTICE MANUAL, JM § 9-11.151 15 Rules Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2 19 N.

ause the government was attempting to deprive Maxwell of notice and an opportunity to be heard); Martindell, 594 F.2d at 294; see U.S. CONST. amend. V. Maxwell also had a privacy interest in the materials subject to the subpoena, including most especially her deposition transcripts. Mot. Ex. A (defining "c

A and other AUSAs (Nov. 30, 2018—Dec. 6, 2018) (Sealed) EXHIBIT O: Email from Stan Pottinger to AUSA cc'ing Brad Edwards and Sigrid McCawley, re Daniel Siad (Mar. 3, 2016) (Sealed) EXHIBIT P: Supplemental Privilege Log, Apr. 4, 2016 EXHIBIT Q: Defendant's Response in Opposition to Motion to Exceed Pres

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x 20 Cr. 330 (MN) REPLY MEMORANDUM OF GHISLAINE MAXWELL IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION UNDER THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE TO SUPPRESS ALL EVIDE

Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell EFTA00028929 --- PAGE BREAK --- Table

ts Fable of Authorities ii Table of Exhibits iv Introduction and Summary of the Argument 1 I. The Facts 2 II. The Government's Response to Maxwell's Motion. 6 A. The Government's Defenses Are Not Credible. 7 B. Assuming the Government's Defenses Are Worthy of Belief, the Government Still

N: Emails between AUSA and AUSA and other AUSAs (Nov. 30, 2018—Dec. 6, 2018) (Sealed) EXHIBIT O: Email from Stan Pottinger to AUSA McCawley, re Daniel Siad (Mar. 3, 2016) (Sealed) cc'ing Brad Edwards and Sigrid EXHIBIT P: Supplemental Privilege Log, Apr. 4, 2016 EXHIBIT Q: Defendant's Response in opp

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x 20 Cr. 330 (MN) REPLY MEMORANDUM OF GHISLAINE MAXWELL IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION UNDER THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE TO SUPPRESS ALL EVIDE

& GRESSER LLP Bobbi C. Sternheim Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell EFTA00029100 --- PAGE BREAK --- Table

ts Fable of Authorities ii Table of Exhibits iv Introduction and Summary of the Argument 1 I. The Facts 2 II. The Government's Response to Maxwell's Motion. 6 A. The Government's Defenses Are Not Credible. 7 B. Assuming the Government's Defenses Are Worthy of Belief, the Government Still

I: Emails between AUSA and AUSA and other AUSAs (Nov. 30, 2018—Dec. 6, 2018) (Sealed) EXHIBIT O: Email from Stan Pottinger to AUSA McCawley, re Daniel Siad (Mar. 3, 2016) (Sealed) cc'ing Brad Edwards and Sigrid EXHIBIT P: Supplemental Privilege Log, Apr. 4, 2016 EXHIBIT Q: Defendant's Response in Opp