Epstein Secrets

CHRISTU,MAURA SLOPE TRAIL LLC BOYLES,KEVAN K GILBANE,THOMAS SAFFER,VIVIA

RPHY,GARY JOHNSON,THEODORE M FISHER,MARCELLA PALMERIO,IMOGENE W BARBERIAN,HARRY

jeffrey-epstein-maxwell-case-20201013- jinz117zdrzdgrbbs7yc6bfnszu-stoty.htnal. 8 EFTA00086670 At that time, however, the government did not act. Boles "was particularly frustrated by the failure to pursue a perjury charge [against Maxwell]," reported one person, who recalled him saying, "We have h

or who was deposed in the case. The prosecutor defended the subpoena's breadth—which sought all "copies of discovery and related materials" irMv. Marvell—on the ground that the government simply had too little knowledge of what was in the law firm's files to craft a more narrowly tailored subpoena:

uring two civil depositions conducted by Boies Schiller in a defamation action it filed against Maxwell on behalf of one of the firm's clients. v. Marvell, Case No. 15-cv-7433 (LAP) (S.D.N.Y). A Protective Order entered in that case prohibited the parties and their lawyers from sharing confidential di

ell-case-20201013- jinz117zdrzdgrbbs7yc6bfnszu-stoty.htnal. 8 EFTA00011464 --- PAGE BREAK --- At that time, however, the government did not act. Boles "was particularly frustrated by the failure to pursue a perjury charge [against Maxwell]," reported one person, who recalled him saying, "We have h

uring two civil depositions conducted by Boies Schiller in a defamation action it filed against Maxwell on behalf of one of the firm's clients. v. Marvell, Case No. 15-cv-7433 (LAP) (S.D.N.Y). A Protective Order entered in that case prohibited the parties and their lawyers from sharing confidential di

ell-case-20201013- jinz117zdrzdgrbbs7yc6bfnszu-stoty.htnal. 8 EFTA00029089 --- PAGE BREAK --- At that time, however, the government did not act. Boles "was particularly frustrated by the failure to pursue a perjury charge [against Maxwell]," reported one person, who recalled him saying, "We have h

uring two civil depositions conducted by Boies Schiller in a defamation action it filed against Maxwell on behalf of one of the firm's clients. v. Marvell, Case No. 15-cv-7433 (LAP) (S.D.N.Y). A Protective Order entered in that case prohibited the parties and their lawyers from sharing confidential di

ell-case-20201013- jinz117zdrzdgrbbs7yc6bfnszu-stoty.htnal. 8 EFTA00029828 --- PAGE BREAK --- At that time, however, the government did not act. Boles "was particularly frustrated by the failure to pursue a perjury charge [against Maxwell]," reported one person, who recalled him saying, "We have h