Epstein Secrets

enies." "Ms. Roberts claims are obvious lies and should be treated as such and not publicized as news, as they are defamatory." 4 EFTA00792759 "Ghislaine Maxwell's original response to the lies and defamatory claims remains the same. Maxwell strongly denies allegations of an unsavory nature, which have appeared

l was living in New York. Plaintiff is a United States Citizen. Plaintiff is seeking damages in excess of $75,000.00. Defendant's Statement: Ms. Maxwell agrees with the Plaintiff's statement, above. iv. A brief summary by each party of the claims and defenses that party has asserted which remain to

t the repetition of such old defamatory claims." GM 00068. Plaintiff's Complaint also seeks damages

York Plaintiff, Case No.: 15-cv-07433-RWS v. Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT Pu

in excess of $75,000.00. Defendant's Statement: Ms. Maxwell agrees with the Plaintiff's statement, above. iv

ssary to authenticate business records under FRE 803(b) 27. Any witnesses necessary for impeachment or rebuttal 28. Dr. Kliman (expert) 29. Dr. Coonan (expert) 30. Jim Jansen (expert) 31. Chris Andersen (expert) 32. Bill Chandler (rebuttal expert) 33. Dianne Flores (expert) Plaintiff reserv

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK X Plaintiff, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL Defendant. X 15-cv-07433-RWS DEFENDANT'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE IN TOTO CERTAIN DEPOSITIONS DESIGNATED BY PLAIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK X Plaintiff, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL Defendant. X 15-cv-07433-RWS DEFENDANT'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE IN TOTO CERTAIN DEPOSITIONS DESIGNATED BY PLAINTIFF FOR

Laura A. Menninger Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Ty Gee HADDON, MORGAN AND FOREMAN, P.C. 150 East 10th Avenue Denver, CO 80203 EFTA00595612 Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell ("Ms. Maxwell") files her Reply in Support of the Motion in Limine to Exclude In Toto certain depositions designated by Plaintiff for use at trial a

203 EFTA00595612 Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell ("Ms. Maxwell") files her Reply in Support of the Motion in Li

ff may present in her case-in-chief. Ms. Maxwell has filed well-founded motions in limine to exclude the testimony of both Dr. Kliman and Professor Coonan prohibiting from providing their credibility and vouching opinions. This is the subject matter of Dr. Esplin's rebuttal report which explains that

ce on the same subject matter identified" in the expert report of another party, there would be no basis to for Dr. Esplin to testify if Kliman and Coonan are excluded. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C)(ii). Moreover, because Dr. Esplin is a designated rebuttal expert, it is entirely improper to have any por

ch he denies." "Ms. claims are obvious lies and should be treated as such and not publicized as news, as they are defamatory." 4 EFTA00617399 "Ghislaine Maxwell's original response to the lies and defamatory claims remains the same. Maxwell strongly denies allegations of an unsavory nature, which have appeared

l was living in New York. Plaintiff is a United States Citizen. Plaintiff is seeking damages in excess of $75,000.00. Defendant's Statement: Ms. Maxwell agrees with the Plaintiff's statement, above. iv. A brief summary by each party of the claims and defenses that party has asserted which remain to

t the repetition of such old defamatory claims." GM 00068. Plaintiff's Complaint also seeks damages

York Plaintiff, Case No.: 15-cv-07433-RWS v. Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT Pu

in excess of $75,000.00. Defendant's Statement: Ms. Maxwell agrees with the Plaintiff's statement, above. iv

ssary to authenticate business records under FRE 803(b) 27. Any witnesses necessary for impeachment or rebuttal 28. Dr. Kliman (expert) 29. Dr. Coonan (expert) 30. Jim Jansen (expert) 31. Chris Andersen (expert) 32. Bill Chandler (rebuttal expert) 33. Dianne Flores (expert) Plaintiff reserv

K UNITED STATES OF AMERICA S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. THE GOVERNMENT'S OMNIBUS MEMORANDUM

K UNITED STATES OF AMERICA S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. THE GOVERNMENT'S OMNIBUS ME

exual abuse but not a necessary consequence of sexual abuse, jurors have no means to determine whether a Minor Victim is lying or telling the truth GM 7 The defendant also argues that Dr. is not an expert in "the human brain or memory generally." (Def. Mot. 3 at 17). The overnment agrees. But Dr.

m-3's allegations "may reflect conduct 43 EFTA00088845 undertaken in furtherance of the charged conspiracy or be relevant to prove facts such as Maxwell's state of mind." (id. at 26-27). B. Applicable Law It is axiomatic that the Government may offer proof of acts included within the indictment. Th

s case, and evidence that adds context and dimension to the government's proof of the charges can have that tendency." Id.; accord United States v. Coonan, 938 F.2d 1553, 1561 (2d Cir. 1991). The Second Circuit has repeatedly held that actions and statements are admissible as direct evidence of the cri