Epstein Secrets

Boies it was issued. The materials provided by Boies Schiller inclnin addition tIl inscripts of Maxwell and other individuals, materials proday N/14!IME lles, and court-relatedpleadings in the ase. 7. Magistrate Juda jOrder On or about April 9, 201

on in ordering the unsealing of the deposition materials and that Maxwell's interests outweighed the public's interests in access to the materials. n. Maxwell, No.20-2413 (2d Cir.), (Dkt. No. 140-1 at 2). On October 19, 2020, the Second Circuit found that Judge Preska "correctly held that the deposition ma

eeting in the summer of 2016 after Maxwell allegedly 35 See Stephen Rex Brown, Manhattan federal prosecutors declined to pursue Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell case in 2016: sources, New York Daily News, Oct. 13, 2020, https://www.nydailynews.corninew-york/ny-jeffrey-epstein-maxwell-case-20201013- jmzh17zdr

osecutors declined to pursue Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell case in 2016: sources, New York Daily New

al. On February 8, 2021, Judge Preska "decline[d] Ms. Maxwell's invitation to reconsider its order" and noted

er assertion that was instrumental in fomenting the Maxwell prosecution" (Def. Mot 3 at 2) (emphasis in orig

and suppress evidence by invoking their supervisory authority. Consistent with that principle, and given that this power is "sparingly exercised," Iambus, 897 F.3d at 401, (emphasis in original), this Court should not elect to do so here where the defendant has not established a violation of her Four

Foley Square New York, NY 10007 Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.0 Jeffrey S. PagRoca Denver, Colorado 80203 wv.rw.nmnaw.com Re: United States v. Ghisiaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Response to Dkt. No. 227, Government's April 21.2021 Letter re Ms. Maxwell's Motions to Suppress Dear Judge Nathan: We write in

80203 wv.rw.nmnaw.com Re: United States v. Ghisiaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Response to Dkt. No. 227, Government's April 21.2021 Letter re Ms. Maxwell's Motions to Suppress Dear Judge Nathan: We write in response to the government's letter about Ms. Maxwell's pending motions to suppress and requ

kt. No. 227, Government's April 21.2021 Letter re Ms. Maxwell's Motions to Suppress Dear Judge Nathan: We wr

rado 80203 wv.rw.nmnaw.com Re: United States v. Ghisiaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Response to Dkt. No. 2

tly would violate due process for the government to be allowed to use that evidence at all, for any purpose. U.S. CONST. amend. V; United States v. Iambus, 897 F.3d 368, 386 (2d Cir. 2018) ("It is within the court's inherent authority to suppress evidence gathered unlawfully in order to maintain the i

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

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ii TABLE OF EXHIBITS iv INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT 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

osecutors declined to pursue Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell case in 2016, New York Daily News (Oct. 1

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

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ii TABLE OF EXHIBITS iv INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT 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

osecutors declined to pursue Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell case in 2016, New York Daily News (Oct. 1

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

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ii TABLE OF EXHIBITS iv INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT 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 Boles Schiller's Refusal To Comply With The Protective Order 6 D. The

osecutors declined to pursue Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell case in 2016, New York Daily News (Oct. 1

Pagliuca 150 East I Oth Avenue Denver, Colorado 80203 PH 303.831.7364 EX 303.832.2628 wvv.hmftaw.com jpogliucatihmflaw.com Re: United States v. Ghisiaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Response to Dkt. No. 227, Government's April 21.2021 Letter re Ms. Maxwell's Motions to Suppress Dear Judge Nathan: We write in

jpogliucatihmflaw.com Re: United States v. Ghisiaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Response to Dkt. No. 227, Government's April 21.2021 Letter re Ms. Maxwell's Motions to Suppress Dear Judge Nathan: We write in response to the government's letter about Ms. Maxwell's pending motions to suppress and requ

kt. No. 227, Government's April 21.2021 Letter re Ms. Maxwell's Motions to Suppress Dear Judge Nathan: We wr

.com jpogliucatihmflaw.com Re: United States v. Ghisiaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Response to Dkt. No. 2

tly would violate due process for the government to be allowed to use that evidence at all, for any purpose. U.S. CONST. amend. V; United States v. Iambus, 897 F.3d 368, 386 (2d Cir. 2018) ("It is within the court's inherent authority to suppress evidence gathered unlawfully in order to maintain the i