DOJ-OGR-00011439.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 732 Filed 07/14/22 Page16 of 25 The Honorable Alison J. Nathan November 22, 2021 Page 16 whether they are telling the truth, and if they aren’t, she is allowed to impeach them. Fed. R. Evid. 613(b) (allowing proof of inconsistent statement by extrinsic evidence). The government’s position is classic gamesmanship. The government says that whatever the accusers told the government is good enough, and we should trust the accusers’ accounts, filtered by their lawyers. But the government also knows that it “is under no obligation to turn over that which it does not have,” United States v. Upton, 856 F. Supp. 727, 746 (E.D.N.Y. 1994), which is why it has not obtained the material. This is why Ms. Maxwell needs the Court’s assistance. Ms. Maxwell is also allowed to present as trial exhibits documents that prove the amount that the accusers were paid. A visual image can have in some cases more of an impact on the jury, and Ms. Maxwell should be permitted to present her defense in whatever format she chooses, not the format of the government’s choosing. Because Ms. Maxwell does not have the payment records, and because the records are not otherwise procurable, this Court should reject the government’s argument.* 2. Claim Release Forms. The claim release forms are not otherwise procurable, and this Nixon factor is satisfied. The EVCP partially disagrees with this argument: “at least two courts in this district have ordered plaintiffs to produce their EVCP releases to Maxwell (in one case with the amount * The government’s alternative request that the EVCP produce the records to the Court for in camera review is bizarre, Govt. Mot. at 3, for that is exactly what Ms. Maxwell requested in her motion. Mot. at 1 (“The document should be returned to this Court for an in camera review and, subject to this Court’s review, disclosed to the defense to be used for impeachment of the witnesses at trial.’’). DOJ-OGR-00011439