Epstein Secrets

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Plaintiff Case No. 15-cv-07433-RWS v. HEARING REQUESTED Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO HIS MOTION TO QUASH TRIAL SUBPOENA Mr. Epstein respectfully requests that he be per

to repeat his assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege. Second, plaintiff argues that Mr. Epstein should be required to appear because defendant Maxwell has objected to the use of Mr. Epstein's deposition testimony, claiming that he is not an unavailable witness. Response at 3. This is simply a non-i

Case No. 15-cv-07433-RWS v. HEARING REQUESTED Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO P

intiff's case in chief. Nor does speculation that Ms. Maxwell might object to the authenticity of the "blackbo

ge. Response at 3-4. Leaving aside the question whether one can "contaminate" proceedings by quoting from opinions of the Supreme Court, see Ohio v. Reiner, 532 U.S. 17, 21 (2001)("we have emphasized that one of the Fifth Amendment's basic functions . . . is to protect innocent men ... who otherwise mi

/15 Page 1 of 29 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK X PLAINTIFF, V. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, DEFENDANT. X 15-cv-07433-RWS GHISLAINE MAXWELL'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT Laura A. Menninger, Esq. HADDON, MORGAN AND FOREMAN, P.C. 150 East 10th Ave

r CO 80203 Tel: Dated: November 30, 2015 EFTA00595583 Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 15 Filed 12/01/15 Page 2 of 29 Table of Contents I. MS. MAXWELL'S STATEMENTS ARE PRIVILEGED 9 A. The Self-Defense Privilege Protects Ms. Maxwell's Statements 9 B. The Pre-Litigation Privilege Protects Ms. Maxw

attributed statement responds directly to allegations and claims made by Plaintiff. Compl. 1 31. Likewise to the extent the claimed statement that "Ghislaine Maxwell's original response to the lies and defamatory claims remains the same" (Compl. 1 32) refers to an earlier statement describing Plaintiff's "factual

led 12/01/15 Page 2 of 29 Table of Contents I. MS. MAXWELL'S STATEMENTS ARE PRIVILEGED 9 A. The Self-Defen

force, Inc. v. Alden Personnel, Inc., 288 F.Supp.2d 513, 516 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) 16, 21 Kirk v. Heppt, 532 F.Supp.2d 586 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) 14 Krepps v. Reiner, 588 F.Supp.2d 471, 483 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) 7 Liberman v. Gelstein, 80 N.Y.2d 429, 590 (N.Y. 1992) 22 McNamee v. Clemens, 762 F.Supp.2d 584, 601 (E.D

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Plaintiff Case No v. Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO HIS MOTION TO QUASH TRIAL SUBPOENA Far from being an "important witness," as plaint

to repeat his assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege. Second, plaintiff argues that Mr. Epstein should be required to appear because defendant Maxwell has objected to the use of Mr. Epstein's deposition testimony, claiming that he is not an unavailable witness. Response at 3. This is simply a non-i

ERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Plaintiff Case No v. Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S REPLY TO P

intiff's case in chief. Nor does speculation that Ms. Maxwell might object to the authenticity of the "blackbo

ge. Response at 3-4. Leaving aside the question whether one can "contaminate" proceedings by quoting from opinions of the Supreme Court, see Ohio v. Reiner, 532 U.S. 17, 21 (2001)("we have emphasized that one of the Fifth Amendment's basic functions . . . is to protect innocent men ... who otherwise mi

an interest in the artist's younger sister, "A," who was 16 years' old at the time. Page 4 of 9 EFTA00179193 12. Mr. Epstein and his associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, made arrangements and paid for "M" to fly home to Arizona for the primary purpose of taking artistic photographs of her family members in the nude

ted Mr. Epstein's office and asked for one of Mr. Epstein's assistants to look for the missing photographs. "M" also confronted Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell about the missing photographs, which they claimed they did not possess. A few weeks later "M" received a telephone call from an unidentified caller

FTA00179193 12. Mr. Epstein and his associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, made arrangements and paid for "M" to f

photographs. "M" also confronted Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell about the missing photographs, which they claimed

e unprotected assertions that anything in the computers is incriminating as a precondition to asserting the act-of-production privilege. See Ohio v. Reiner, 532 U.S. 17, 21 (2001)("[W]e have emphasized that one of the Fifth Amendment's basic functions . . . is to protect innocent men . . . who otherwis

orking sites, and e-mails. Request No. 17. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. Request No. 18. Any and all docume

unications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, t

ng to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters,

dings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11 th Cir. 1985), citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77, 94 S.C. 316, 322 (1973). See also Ohio v. Reiner, 532 U.S. 17, 21, 121 S.Ct. 1252 (2001)(The Fifth Amendment privilege is also available to those who claim innocence. One of the Fifth Amendment's

orking sites, and e-mails. Request No. 17. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. Request No. 18. Any and all docume

unications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, t

ng to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters,

ceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985), citing Lefkowitz v. Turlev 414 U.S. 70, 77, 94 S.C. 316, 322 (1973). See also Ohio v. Reiner, 532 U.S. 17, 21, 121 S.Ct. 1252 (2001)(The Fifth Amendment privilege is also available to those who claim innocence. One of the Fifth Amendment's

No. 2 v. Epstein Page 17 Request No. 17. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, and e-mails. Response: Defendant is asserting

munications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters, notes,

ng to communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but not limited to, letters,

ceedings." Edwin v. Price 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11i' Cir. 1985), citing Lefkowitz v. Turley 414 U.S. 70, 77, 94 S.C. 316, 322 (1973). See also Ohio v. Reiner 532 U.S. 17, 21, 121 S.Q. 1252 (2001)(The Fifth Amendment privilege is also available to those who claim innocence. One of the Fifth Amendment's "b

LING PALM BEACH LLC OTTO,JONATHAN B MAXWELL,GERTRUDE COLEMAN,CATHERINE FISHER,K

BEACH BEESON,JOHN KRAUSS,K W RINKER,JOHN J DERRIN,MICHELLE SALTZMAN,SHI

Canada Mealtime Comp Date of Approval or Rekcoon 2— 7.4o-99 canoes a 1341000=Na. '526705494 IA Sipatum Of ' • ' 0.0"" Wald Donnelly SDNY GM 02754203 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00241125 EFTA01326718 1 • ••••rreir--1 - rl I CAMERA RCRA NO,

(As shown on regisaarion cieretteffe) TWO EMBARCADERO CENTER SAN FRANCISCO CA. 94111 A.• No FAA we 00/ • S. Typo Ural Mae Model renal No. Reiner Anersiken AnIFRAME ' i Orsonbod in nom 1 abOvel XX (A S I PR0PD.LER ' • . I—..— • • Menutacearer S. Confortetty Stalarosat C. Grooms