4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
18 / 4
Mentions
7433-RWS Document 189 Filed 06/06/16 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK X INNIErt INIMINME, Plaintiff, v. GHISLATNE MAXWELL, Defendant. X 15-cv-07433-RWS DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO EXCEED PRESUMPTIVE TEN DEPOSITION LIMIT Laura A. Menninger Jeffr
er Jeffrey S. Pagliuca HADDON, MORGAN, AND FOREMAN, P.C. EFTA00097395 Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 189 Filed 06/06/16 Page 2 of 11 Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell ("Ms. Maxwell") files this Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Exceed Presumptive Ten Deposition Limit, and states as follows: INTRODUC
9 Filed 06/06/16 Page 4 of 11 Plaintiff makes a bizarre argument that somehow this testimony can be used to create an adverse inference against Ms. Maxwell,2 despite the fact that Ms. Maxwell did not invoke the Fifth Amendment and she testified fully and answered every question posed to her with the only
cument 189 Filed 06/06/16 Page 2 of 11 Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell ("Ms. Maxwell") files this Response in Op
06/16 Page 2 of 11 Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell ("Ms. Maxwell") files this Response in Opposition to Plaintiff
parties' resources, the importance of the issues at stake in the action, and the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues." Atkinson v. Goord, No. 01 CIV. 0761 LAKHBP, 2009 WL 890682, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 2, 2009); Fed. It Civ. P. 26(b)(1). If Plaintiff chooses to use her depositions in th
ority of the bars that might be relied upon by Ms Maxwells require the extradition judge to make a finding
ts, a review that formed the basis of changes to the 2003 Extradition Act. (Id. Annex B ¶ 3.1). In Mr. Perry's opinion, it is "highly unlikely that Ghislaine Maxwell would be able successfully to resist extradition to the United States" in connection with this case. (Perry Rep. 12(e)). After concluding that none
ide any answer on this issue. 2 The DOJ Memorandum and the Peterson Case In support of its argument that the French government would not extradite Ms Ghislaine Maxwell to the USA, the government relies on the case of Mr Hans Peterson, a dual French American citizen whose extradition to the US was denied by
seding indictment dated 7 July 2020. In addition to those conclusions, the following three points may be made. 3. First, as noted in the Opinion2, Ms Maxwell's waiver of extradition would be admissible in any extradition proceedings in England and Wales. While such a document cannot compel a requested pers
r, CO 80203 Phone: Bobbi C. Sternheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim 33 West 19th Street - 4th Floor New York, NY 10011 Phone: Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell II EFTA00093319 cailase:20-agloDacument ntlinfiAtIllf0891, 806E128B2Blage34figrl 3tI 4 Exhibit A EFTA00093320 Ckast.20-U-0003.00dblit DOditrehlei
when denying bail. "A motion for reconsideration may not be used ... as a vehicle for relitigating issues already decided by the Court." Jackson v. Goord, 664 F. Supp. 2d 307, 313 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (internal quotation marks omitted). The Court already considered and rejected the defendant's efforts to
[t]he government's evidence at this early juncture of the case appears strong" based on the "multiple victims who provided detailed accounts of Ms. Maxwell's involvement in serious crimes," as well as corroboration in the form of "significant contemporaneous documentary evidence." (Id.). Third, the Cou
K x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x THE GOVERNMENT'S MEMORANDUM IN O
K x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x THE GOVERNMENT'S MEMORAN
ltiple victims who provided detailed accounts of Ms. Maxwell's involvement in serious crimes," as well as cor
when denying bail. "A motion for reconsideration may not be used ... as a vehicle for relitigating issues already decided by the Court." Jackson v. Goord, 664 F. Supp. 2d 307, 313 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (internal quotation marks omitted). The Court already considered and rejected the defendant's efforts to
[t]he government's evidence at this early juncture of the case appears strong" based on the "multiple victims who provided detailed accounts of Ms. Maxwell's involvement in serious crimes," as well as corroboration in the form of "significant contemporaneous documentary evidence." (Id.). Third, the Cou
-x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x THE GOVERNMENT'S MEMORANDUM IN O
-x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x THE GOVERNMENT'S MEMORAN
ltiple victims who provided detailed accounts of Ms. Maxwell's involvement in serious crimes," as well as cor
hen denying bail. "A motion for reconsideration may not be used . . . as a vehicle for relitigating issues already decided by the Court." Jackson v. Goord, 664 F. Supp. 2d 307, 313 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (internal quotation marks omitted). The Court already considered and rejected the defendant's efforts to
Entities connected to both Ghislaine Maxwell and Goord

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSONSouthern District
LOCATION
United States
LOCATION
Michael Cohen
PERSON
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATIONJeffrey Pagliuca
PERSONFBI
ORGANIZATION
Audrey Strauss
PERSON
Michael Jackson
PERSON
John F. Kennedy
PERSON
Jean-Luc Brunel
PERSONSigrid McCawley
PERSON
Paul Cassell
PERSON
United Kingdom
LOCATIONSecond Circuit
ORGANIZATION
Southern District of New York
ORGANIZATION
Glenn Dubin
PERSON
Stanton
PERSONMorrison
PERSON
Rahm Emanuel
PERSON