Judge delays release of bombshell Ghislaine Maxwell court documents
Ghislaine Maxwell stalls AGAIN on the upcoming release of unsealed docs, saying proposed redactions would still identify ‘non-parties and alleged victims’, as judge has already delayed bombshell depositions until at least next week
- Ghislaine Maxwell has filed another request regarding the upcoming release of unsealed documents
- She claims proposed redactions would still identify ‘non-parties, including alleged victims’
- The files were due to be made public today, containing potentially-incriminating testimony she gave in a defamation suit from 2015
- But judge blocked their release until at least next week after last-minute appeal
- Appeal allows Maxwell, who is being prosecuted by New York’s Southern District, to appeal to the Second District – which may keep testimony hidden
By Chris Pleasance for MailOnline and Cheyenne Roundtree For Dailymail.com and Ryan Parry West Coast Editor
Published: 06:57 EDT, 30 July 2020 | Updated: 15:13 EDT, 30 July 2020
Ghislaine Maxwell has once again attempted to stall the upcoming release of unsealed documents in a defamation case, claiming the proposed redactions would still identify ‘non-parties, including alleged victims’.
Judge Loretta Preska ruled that bombshell depositions would remain secret until at least next week after her legal team filed a last-minute appeal on Wednesday night.
The documents, which contain hundreds of pages of potentially-incriminating testimony she gave to investigators as part of Epstein victim Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s 2015 defamation case against her, were due to be released today.
Now, the 58-year-old’s legal team is attempting to have the other documents slated for release today amended, which could possibly slow down their release.
Her lawyers claim the documents still identify non-parties and other alleged victims, noting they will file their new proposed redactions at some point today.
Ghislaine Maxwell has once again attempted to stall the upcoming release of unsealed documents in a defamation case, claiming the proposed redactions would still identify ‘non-parties, including alleged victims’
Judge Loretta Preska, who had initially ruled the documents must be unsealed today, agreed to keep them hidden until at least Monday while an appeal is filed to a different court
Maxwell’s attorney Laura Menninger says the proposed redactions by Giuffre’s legal team contains ‘errors which reveal the names of Nonparties, including alleged victims. For example, in [redacted] plaintiff proposes redacting the name of alleged victims in some places but not in others.’
She adds: ‘Both of these two alleged victims are represented by counsel and sought confidentiality for their depositions; neither has yet been afforded notice or an opportunity to be heard with respect to this unsealing. Plaintiff’s error will result in their never having the opportunity to be heard.’
Maxwell’s lawyers also argue that in some instances, the names of non-parties – although redacted – would lead the person to be ‘easily’ identified due to the details given about them.
Menninger writes: ‘By way of example, plaintiff proposes redacting the name of an alleged victim of Mr. Epstein but includes all of the rest of the “specific conduct” that would lead to the identity of the person (again, who requested confidentiality in the discovery process) to be easily ascertained by the media.’
Giuffre’s lawyer Sigrid McCawley quickly responded to the request, telling Judge Preska she still hadn’t received Maxwell’s unredacted letter, meaning she and her team can’t see the redaction objections to their proposed redactions.
On Wednesday, Maxwell’s lawyers filed a last-minute appeal asking for Maxwell and Jane Doe’s depositions remain sealed until at least Monday while they appeal to a Second District court in a last-ditch attempt to keep them under lock and key.
Judge Loretta Preska, who sits as part of the Southern District, agreed to the request – but warned Maxwell’s attorneys they are going over ‘plowed ground’, the New York Post reported.
Maxwell’s lawyers argued the depositions were confidential and under a protective order, and federal prosecutors in her sex trafficking case wrongfully got a hold of the documents and used them to form some of the charges against her.
Maxwell’s lawyers argued the depositions were confidential and under a protective order, and federal prosecutors in her sex trafficking case wrongfully got a hold of the documents and used them to form some of the charges against her
Epstein victims are fearful that sex tapes and photographs featuring them being abused could be described as part of the unsealed evidence and eventually shown in court during Maxwell’s criminal trial, DailyMail.com can disclose. Pictured: Epstein survivor Virginia Roberts Giuffre
They claim Maxwell was set up for a ‘perjury trap’, alleging Giuffre was ‘privy to and participating in an ongoing criminal investigation’ in 2015 and 2016 where Maxwell was a ‘person of interest’ in that case.
Maxwell’s attorney Ty Gee wrote that despite a court order that prevented Giuffre from handing over the deposition to law enforcement, the transcript was still leaked to New York prosecutors.
Meanwhile, Epstein victims are fearful that sex tapes and photos featuring them being abused could be described as part of the unsealed evidence and eventually shown in court during Maxwell’s criminal trial, DailyMail.com can disclose.
High profile attorney Lisa Bloom, who represents six Epstein victims, says her clients are ‘very concerned’ and she hopes prosecutors will notify victims first if any footage of them is to be used in court.
Another attorney, Florida based lawyer Spencer Kuvin, who also reps six Epstein victims, said his clients are ‘incredibly embarrassed and upset’ that footage could be aired in a courtroom.
‘Any active prosecution that may involve video tapes or the fear of video tapes being utilized by the prosecution is going to bring about anxiety to my clients,’ he said.
‘Having said that my clients would want Ghislaine Maxwell to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, as well as any co-conspirators.’
Of the six young women Kuvin reps in the Epstein case two were involved in the original case against the now deceased billionaire financier in 2007/2008. One of these women was in the probable cause affidavit, Kuvin says.
High profile attorney Lisa Bloom, who represents six Epstein victims, says her clients are ‘very concerned’ about the footage
The upcoming release of the unsealed documents could include details about Maxwell’s sex life that her lawyers have previously tried to stop from being released, relating to a seven-hour, 418-page deposition Maxwell gave, which her legal team said was ‘extremely personal, confidential’.
They will also include communications between Maxwell and Epstein from January 2015 when Roberts made explosive allegations about them in court papers.
In the papers Roberts claimed she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew three times when she was just 17 at Epstein’s command.
The case ruled on last Thursday was originally brought by Roberts, now a 36-year-old mother-of-three who lives in Australia and goes by her married name Virginia Giuffre.
She sued Maxwell in 2015 for defamation because Maxwell accused her of lying.
Roberts said in court filings that Maxwell recruited her and other girls into a sex trafficking ring for ‘politically connected and financially powerful people’.
The case was settled in 2017 for an undisclosed sum but media organizations sued for documents in the case to be made public.
During last week’s hearing at Manhattan’s federal court, Judge Preska said Maxwell’s right to privacy was outweighed by the need for the documents to become public.
The upcoming release of the unsealed documents could include details about Maxwell’s sex life that her lawyers have previously tried to stop from being released, relating to a seven-hour, 418-page deposition Maxwell gave, which her legal team said was ‘extremely personal, confidential’
She went through the dozens of documents, which included Giuffre’s depositions and various dull-sounding legal papers.
The contents however could be explosive and may contain fresh evidence against the wealthy elite who socialized with Epstein.
The lawsuit to release the documents was originally filed by the Miami Herald and their reporter Julie Brown, whose series on Epstein called ‘Perversion of Justice’ in 2018 put renewed focus on the case and led to his arrest last July.
As a result there are thousands of pages of documents which are being released on a rolling basis.
Each time a person’s name comes up they are notified and given the chance to make objections to their name becoming public.
There were two John Does in this latest batch but they did not make any complaints when approached to make any comments, according to court filings.
The Second Circuit had already ordered 2,000 pages of documents to be made public and they were released last August, the day before Epstein killed himself.
The documents included the unpublished manuscript of a memoir from Epstein accuser Virginia Roberts which detailed her years of abuse by him.
The documents will also include communications between Maxwell and Epstein from January 2015 when Virginia Roberts made explosive allegations about them in court papers. In the papers Roberts claimed that she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew (pictured together) three times when she was 17 at Epstein’s command
There were depositions from Epstein’s pilots, his former associates and flight logs showing him traveling the globe with his victims and famous people such as Bill Clinton.
Among those who have taken an interest in the defamation case are lawyers for a ‘John Doe’ who appears to be somebody who will be featured in the documents.
His identity is unclear but the powerful men who have been accused of involvement with Epstein include former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barack.
On Monday, Maxwell’s legal team fought to have any incriminating nude photos and sexualized videos of Maxwell marked ‘highly confidential’ in her sex trafficking trial.
Prosecutors and Maxwell’s lawyers are currently hammering out an agreement on how sensitive documents in the high-profile case should be handled before they hand over to each other the evidence they plan to use at trial.
The reference to videos appears in a proposed version of the agreement lodged by Maxwell’s lawyers.
The proposed order says any ‘Highly Confidential Information’ either side plans to use in the case remains sealed and can only be viewed behind closed doors with lawyers present.
‘Highly Confidential Information contains nude, partially-nude, or otherwise sexualized images, videos, or other depictions of individuals,’ the court documents said.
The wording of the legal filing raises the prospect that the US Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York could be sitting on explicit photos and videos for their explosive case against Maxwell, the alleged madam to late billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
