Epstein Secrets

708:23 710:9 743:6,12,15 significant (1) 721:12 speak (4) 713:21 716:14 shared (2) 763:22 six (1) 716:9 755:24 717:12 718:3 668:13 698:13 Sigrid (7) 665:3 767:18,25 719:3,13,18 shares (1) 650:9 652:19 skeptical (1) speaking (5) 722:7,14 760:13 724:13,14 714:18 742:21 752:24 723:12

and Thomas 15 Marcy Martinez. Videographer 16 17 Scott will be joining. He just walked in. 17 18 MS. McCAWLEY: On behalf of nonparty 18 19 Sigrid McCawley and my 19 20 colleague Meredith Schultz from Boles. Schiller 20 21 & Plexner. 21 22 22 MR. INDYKE: On behalf of Jeffrey Epstein. 23 23 D

use to answer." Others have 25 non-parties are net permitted to attend. per 722 724 1 done that. I was totally. totally innocent. And I 1 Ms. McCawley's position that its between those 2 had to respond immediately to these false charges. 2 folks if they disagree about that. But as to 3 which is

uestion. 2 A. I don't think he was aware that Jeffrey 2 Please proceed. 3 Epstein had nude an allegation of that kind. 3 A. One of them was a Conner president or 4 Q. At the time when David Markus called you 4 chairman or at least member of the Florida Bar 5 to tell you that Brad Edwards par

Schiller & Flexner LLP OPPOSING ATTORNEY: Sigrid McCawley Court- Judge/ Agency appealed from: Hon. Lorett

l's guilt. For example, Bradley Edwards opined that Ms. Maxwell was "a main facilitator" of Epstein's crimes who "started the whole thing." Id. And Sigrid McCawley praised the prosecutors: "[They] have done an incredible job and they're being very meticulous, they want to make sure that the Indictments stick.

r [name of attorney, with fon, address, phone number and e-mail) Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP OPPOSING ATTORNEY: Sigrid McCawley Court- Judge/ Agency appealed from: Hon. Loretta A. Preska, District Judge (S.D.N.Y.) Please check appropriate boxes: Has movant notifiedr oposin

which they may have refused to testify. . . . [T]he witnesses were entitled to rely upon the terms of a concededly valid protective order and Judge Conner did not abuse his discretion in refusing to vacate or modify that order. Id. at 296-97. Three, the government did not obtain a copy of the deposit

ell's guilt. For example, Mr. Edwards opined that Ms. Maxwell was "a main facilitator" of Mr. Epstein's crimes who "started the whole thing." M Ms. McCawley praised the prosecutors: "[They] have done an incredible job and they're being very meticulous, they want to make sure that the Indictments stick. .

6-0022 FACSIMILE COVER SHEET TO: Laura Menninger, Esq. Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. Fax No. Telephone No. 303.832.2628 301831.7364 FROM: Sigrid S. McCawley, Esq. DATE: February 26, 2016 RE: v. Maxwell, Case no. 15-cv-07433-RWS Total Number of Pages: 26 (including this cover sheet) MESSAGE: Atta

nt which they may have refused to testify.... [T]he witnesses were entitled to rely upon the terms of a concededly valid protective order and Judge Conner did not abuse his discretion in refusing to vacate or modify that order. Id at 296-97. Three, the government did not obtain a copy of the depositi

l's guilt. For example, Mr. Edwards opined that Ms. Maxwell was "a main facilitator" of Mr. Epstein's crimes who "started the whole thing." Id. Ms. McCawley praised the prosecutors: "[They] have done an incredible job and they're being very meticulous, they want to make sure that the Indictments stick. .

nt which they may have refused to testify.... [T]he witnesses were entitled to rely upon the terms of a concededly valid protective order and Judge Conner did not abuse his discretion in refusing to vacate or modify that order. Id at 296-97. Three, the government did not obtain a copy of the depositi

ll's guilt. For example, Mr. Edwards opined that Ms. Maxwell was "a main facilitator" of Mr. Epstein's crimes who "started the whole thing." Id Ms. McCawley praised the prosecutors: "[They] have done an incredible job and they're being very meticulous, they want to make sure that the Indictments stick. .

nt which they may have refused to testify.... [T]he witnesses were entitled to rely upon the terms of a concededly valid protective order and Judge Conner did not abuse his discretion in refusing to vacate or modify that order. M at 296-97. Three, the government did not obtain a copy of the depositio