EFTA00588667.pdf

1 G3hdgium 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 2 3 4 Plaintiff, New York, N.Y. 5 v. 6 GHISLAINE MAXWELL, 7 Defendant. 8 9 March 17, 2016 2:18 p.m. 10 Before: 11 HON. ROBERT W. SWEET, 12 District Judge 13 APPEARANCES 14 15 Attorne s for Plaintiff BY: 16 HADDON MORGAN AND FOREMAN, P.C. 17 Attorneys for Defendant BY: JEFFREY PAGLIUCA 18 LAURA A. MENNINGER 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588667 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588668 2 G3hdgium 1 THE COURT: Thank you all very much. I'm sorry for 2 the inconvenience that I have imposed upon you. I'm sorry 3 about the inconvenience that you have imposed upon me. 4 But having said all of that, this really is the first 5 time that we've had an opportunity, I think, to get together on 6 this case. And let me just say, I think -- I mean, I'm not 7 sure but I think I understand the difficulties of this case. 8 There is an emotional element, obviously, throughout the case 9 on both sides, and I understand that. Fortunately, we're 10 blessed by excellent counsel and it would be nice if they can 11 avoid adopting the emotional flavor of their clients, and I 12 presume that they will be able to do that, it certainly will 13 help, because these issues are going to be difficult and I'm 14 well aware of it. 15 Now, at the outset, there is some discussion in these 16 papers about meet and confer. Let me make clear what I would 17 like from this day forward. On any discovery issues, I would 18 like to have a meet and confer. Now, I understand that defense 19 counsel are living in God's country and they're not cursed with 20 the metropolitan residence. I salute their good judgment in 21 that. And so I will say that I will not require you to meet in 22 person, but I will require you to meet. 23 And I would say this. If you have a meet and confer, 24 I would like to have correspondence between the parties as to 25 what the subject is so that there is an agreed agenda that's SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588669 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588670 3 G3hdgium 1 written and we know that both sides know what it is, and that 2 will help me if, ultimately, the problem gets back to me. So I 3 would say exchange writing as to what it's going to be and have 4 a meeting. It doesn't have to be in person, but it certainly 5 has to be a significant meeting; it can't be just one 6 ten-minute telephone call. 7 So that's how I feel about the meet and confer. 8 Now, I'm not going to get into whether that's relevant 9 or not to the problems which we face today. That's just going 10 forward. As I say, I do hope that you all can -- it won't be 11 easy, but if you deal with these problems as the excellent 12 professionals that you are without the emotional implications, 13 having said that. 14 Now, how to go forward today? My thought is the 15 following. I have read your papers, and to say that I 16 understand the problems would be, I guess, a lie, but I'm 17 trying and you'll help me. I have a list of what I think our 18 issues are and I would like to go through this with you, and 19 then when I'm finished, if we have missed something, I'm sure 20 you will correct me. And I'd be pleased to hear if I determine 21 something, if you think that I'm wrong, that's fine, too. I 22 mean, you can tell me why you think I'm wrong. 23 Now, the first problem is the document -- the issue 24 about improper privilege claims. As I understand that issue, 25 it is the presence of Gow, Cohen and maybe somebody else as SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588671 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588672 4 G3hdgium 1 defeating the privilege, on the one hand. On the other hand, 2 the assertion by the defense that their participation as 3 whatever they are, managers, public relations people, whatever, 4 is necessary for the rendering of legal advice. 5 Parenthetically, there is a subtext there about whose 6 law applies. Let me say, I think we are going to apply New 7 York law in this case. British law may become relevant in some 8 way or other down the road, but for this privilege purpose, I 9 think that's where we are. 10 I think what I would like is I would like any 11 materials that -- the obligation to establish this privilege is 12 obviously Ms. Maxwell's, and I would like any materials that 13 she wants to present to me about these meetings to establish 14 that it was necessary for the rendering of legal advice, I'll 15 review those materials in camera and try to reach a decision. 16 I may need something further after I have looked at them, but I 17 think that's the way I ought to deal with that particular 18 privilege issue. 19 There is a list of documents as to which objections 20 have been made on a variety of bases. I will say probably a 21 catalog of every objection known to the mind of excellent 22 attorneys, and I think we will try to deal with those this 23 afternoon and maybe we'll fail, but let's put those aside just 24 for the moment. 25 The question about a protective order, of course there SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588673 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588674 5 G3hdgium 1 should be a protective order in this case. You are good 2 lawyers and you have been around this track more times than I 3 have and so you can prepare consensually a better protective 4 order than I can, and I urge you to do that. And, in fact, I 5 will give you two weeks to do that. Should you fail, you can 6 present whatever materials you wish to me and I will decide 7 what the protective order is going to be. That's not a good 8 idea because you know the case better than I do, obviously, and 9 so I urge you to resolve it by your litigation skills and not 10 leave it up to the ignorant district court judge who doesn't 11 really get into this kind of thing very often. So you run a 12 risk if you leave it to me. 13 Now, I would say two weeks, and then if you can't get 14 an agreement, maybe three weeks from now we wrestle with that. 15 Hopefully we won't. I have to do that. 16 The deposition -- the defendant of course will be 17 deposed, and we can work out right now when. Obviously, you 18 don't want that deposition until the protective order is 19 completed. So what do we do about that? Do you want to deal 20 with that today, the actual date of the deposition, or should 21 we pass that until we accomplish the protective order? What do 22 you all think about that? 23 MS. Can I be heard on that, your Honor? 24 This is I am counsel for Ms. 25 With respect to the deposition date, the 25th was the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588675 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588676 6 G3hdgium 1 date that my opposing counsel proposed as possibly being 2 available. So we set it for that date, which is next Friday. 3 We also offered to hold that deposition transcript confidential 4 until such time as the protective order could be issued so that 5 there is no barrier to us being able to take this deposition. 6 THE COURT: How about that? Is that OK? 7 MR. PAGLIUCA: Frankly, it is not, your Honor, and the 8 reason is we, clearly from the papers submitted so far and the 9 exchange of counsel, we have a significant disagreement at this 10 point as to what the word "confidential" actually means, and we 11 have proposed to the plaintiff a protective order that we 12 believe is appropriate and neutral -- 13 THE COURT: Well, maybe I can -- can we get over -- if 14 that's the primary issue on the protective order, can we deal 15 with that now? 16 MR. PAGLIUCA: I think there is a secondary -- well, 17 it may not even be secondary. There is another issue that is 18 directly related to that, your Honor, and that is the lack of 19 production of documents from the plaintiff. The Court has not 20 seen these papers yet, but there are in my view significant 21 deficiencies with the Rule 26 disclosures. There have been 22 failure to produce documents. And it is unfair at this point 23 to push these depositions forward without the required exchange 24 of discovery. 25 THE COURT: Let me ask the plaintiff. You really -- SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588677 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588678 7 G3hdgium 1 MS. Could I be heard on that? Thank you, 2 your Honor. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt you. 3 THE COURT: What do you think? 4 MS. Right. The issue is so I issued my 5 deposition notice before they even served discovery requests. 6 THE COURT: OK. All right. 7 MS. I've done 3,000 pages. They've done 8 two emails. 9 THE COURT: Look, doesn't it make sense to resolve any 10 document discovery issues perhaps before the deposition? 11 MS. I don't think so, your Honor. I want 12 the testimony of this defendant in order to move this case 13 forward. Our discovery closes in July. I issued my discovery 14 requests in October. I have not gotten the deposition of the 15 defendant yet. This is a date she is available. She is not 16 leaving the country. She is not going anywhere. I have her in 17 town next Friday. 18 I'll even agree to their protective order if it means 19 I can get her deposition, your Honor. I just need to get this 20 case moving forward. I need one deposition, the deposition of 21 the defendant in this case, who has called my client a liar. 22 We are entitled to depose her and see if she is going to answer 23 the questions about why she was -- 24 THE COURT: All right. OK. 25 MS. I am entitled to answers. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588679 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588680 8 G3hdgium 1 THE COURT: Well -- 2 MR. PAGLIUCA: Your Honor, I think this is a good 3 meeting and it is a meeting that should have happened a long 4 time ago. Let me say to the Court that we proposed to meet 5 with plaintiff's counsel early on in this case to put together 6 a discovery schedule that made sense. We proposed that orally 7 and in writing. That proposal was ignored and rebuffed. And 8 counsel for the plaintiff then unilaterally scheduled a bunch 9 of depositions without conferring on dates. Unilaterally, 10 here's the dates, here are the depositions. We then tried to 11 work through that issue, at the same time trying to work 12 through the protective order issue and the document issue, and 13 we get no response. And I think the agenda here is to gain a 14 tactical advantage by not responding to these requests. 15 THE COURT: Well, I can't believe that lawyers would 16 seek a tactical advantage. I can't believe such a thing. 17 MR. PAGLIUCA: I am shocked. 18 THE COURT: OK. Tell you what we're going to do. 19 We'll -- three weeks, let's see. Her deposition -- this 20 question about document production, that hasn't been teed up, 21 so I don't know -- 22 MS. And can I be heard on that really 23 quickly? I mean, If that were the standard, that they could 24 wait to -- 25 THE COURT: No. It hasn't been teed up, I agree. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588681 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588682 9 G3hdgium 1 (Pause) 2 OK. Then I think what we should do is I'm assuming we 3 will resolve the protective order problem we've sort of slug 4 over the -- can we resolve what's confidential? Is that 5 possible? Could we do that this afternoon, or is that too 6 complicated? 7 MS. Your Honor, I can have the deposition 8 of the defendant in this case and move this case forward. I 9 will agree to their protective order. I just want that 10 deposition. 11 THE COURT: Yes. 12 MS. It is that important to me. 13 THE COURT: I get your point. I understand that. But 14 at the same time, I think, given the nature of all that lies in 15 this, I think it is fair to say no side would like to have this 16 aired, and so we've got to have a protective order that 17 everybody feels comfortable with. 18 MS. Your Honor, you can today enter the 19 protective order that they submit. I will disregard my 20 objections if I get the deposition. 21 THE COURT: Will you agree now to the protective 22 order? 23 MS. Yes. If it means I can get her 24 deposition, yes, I will do that. 25 THE COURT: Oh, OK. Good. Well, that solved that. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588683 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588684 10 G3hdgium 1 MR. PAGLIUCA: It is not as simple as that, your 2 Honor, because this quid pro quo, I'll agree to their 3 protective order if I can have the deposition on the 25th, 4 doesn't solve the problem. 5 THE COURT: At least we've separated it. She has 6 agreed to the protective order. OK? So that's done. OK? 7 Now, why can't we have her deposition upon, whatever 8 it is, a week from Friday? 9 MS. Friday, the 25th, this coming Friday, a 10 week from tomorrow. 11 THE COURT: Oh, a week from tomorrow, yes. 12 MS. Yes. 13 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, we served discovery 14 requests on plaintiff on February 12th. 15 THE COURT: Well, look, that's nice. That's good. 16 But I don't have that, and I think she's right that there is no 17 rule that says you have to get your discovery requests 18 satisfied before the deposition, so 19 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, the responses were due 20 last night yesterday, so that is prior to Ms. Maxwell for the 21 25th. However, as a part of producing that discovery response, 22 they have said they're going to take a month to roll out their 23 production, not just 24 THE COURT: Look. I'll tell you what let's do. I 25 don't have that, but let's -- we'll hold the deposition date. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588685 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588686 11 G3hdgium 1 When we get through with the rest of this stuff, we'll find out 2 if there is something in particular that you want prior to next 3 Friday and see what that is and see if we can get it. How is 4 that? 5 (Pause) 6 OK. Who pays for what and counsel, all of that? 7 Those are interesting problems and who knows how they all come 8 out. I think all of that is best served by reserving them 9 until the conclusion of the case, which is what I shall do. 10 The plaintiff wants to produce on a rolling basis and 11 to amend or add to the privilege log as the production goes 12 forward. I don't see any problem with that. 13 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, that's actually the issue 14 I was just alluding to. I understand -- and I have said I 15 don't have a problem with plaintiff producing her documents 16 over the course of the month because she has said that it is a 17 hardship for her to produce them all last night, which is when 18 they were due. However, she's trying to take our client's 19 deposition in the middle of her rolling production, in other 20 words, show up at the deposition with the documents she happens 21 to get -- 22 THE COURT: That's what I'm saying. Maybe what we'll 23 do is to deal with the document production issue separately. 24 MS. MENNINGER: OK. 25 THE COURT: And if there are some documents that SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588687 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588688 12 G3hdgium 1 really seem to be important and they cannot be produced, then 2 maybe we'll put over the -- we'll see how that works. 3 MS. Your Honor, I may be able to short 4 circuit this. 5 THE COURT: Pardon me? 6 MS. I may be able to short circuit this a 7 little bit. We produced 3,000 pages last night. We are 8 continuing that production. We are moving as fast as we can. 9 We produced a privilege log with over 134 entries on it. We 10 are continuing to move that forward as quickly as we can. 11 With respect to her deposition, your Honor, I'm happy 12 to provide them in advance every document I will be using at 13 her deposition. In other words, if that is their issue, if it 14 means I can get her deposition next Friday, I will share with 15 them any document I intend to use at that deposition. 16 THE COURT: That seems to solve the problem, don't you 17 think? 18 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, I have to disagree. I got 19 this responsive objection last night at 9:30 p.m., while I was 20 here in New York. I've taken a look at it, and I can give your 21 Honor a sense of the types of objections that plaintiff has 22 lodged to our document request. For example, their client sold 23 her diary to Radar Online. It was published on Radar Online. 24 This diary contains plaintiff's allegations against my client. 25 So I asked for the diary that was sold to Radar Online. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588689 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588690 13 G3hdgium 1 THE COURT: You get it. 2 MS. MENNINGER: It is copyright and proprietary 3 protected. We're not going to produce it. So that's the kind 4 of example -- 5 THE COURT: No. You get it. 6 MS. She doesn't have a diary. She might be 7 referring to something else. I mean, my client doesn't have a 8 diary to produce. She doesn't have one. Those were 9 handwritten notes that she gave a reporter. She doesn't have 10 one. 11 THE COURT: So you are saying -- 12 MS. That request is broader. I mean -- 13 THE COURT: No. 14 MS. I didn't know we were going to be 15 addressing my requests today -- 16 THE COURT: as to the diary, you say it doesn't 17 exist. There is no diary, there are no notes, and whatever 18 there is has been the subject of the printed material? 19 MS. Yes. 20 MS. MENNINGER: Excerpts -- excerpts, your Honor, with 21 my client's name on them in plaintiff's handwriting were sold 22 to Radar Online, not the entire document. And when I asked for 23 the entire document, I was told that it is proprietary and 24 copyright protected. 25 THE COURT: What is "proprietary"? SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588691 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588692 14 G3hdgium 1 MS. I think she's referring to a broader 2 request. My client doesn't have a diary, which is what she's 3 addressing right now. I don't have my requests in front of me, 4 your Honor. We were here on their requests. But if you want 5 to read the whole request, I can try and remember what 6 THE COURT: What are we talking -- 7 MS. Did they say I was withholding 8 documents? I don't think I said I was withholding documents on 9 that request. But, again, I don't have it in front of me and I 10 apologize. 11 MS. MENNINGER: The request number 16 reads: "Any 12 diary, journal, or calendar concerning your activity between 13 '96 and '02." 14 Response: Ms. objects to this request to the 15 extent it seeks proprietary- and copyright-protected material. 16 Ms. objects in that it seeks information protected by 17 the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product 18 privilege, the joint defense, interest privilege, the agency 19 privilege, the investigative privilege, the spousal privilege, 20 the accountant/client privilege, and any other applicable 21 privilege." 22 THE COURT: Hot dog. I tell you, that's great. 23 MS. But did I say I didn't have -- 24 THE COURT: Shall we use that as the standard 25 objection to every document request and then let's forget about SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588693 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588694 15 G3hdgium 1 it? OK, let's do this. 2 MS. Your Honor, may I be heard on just one 3 point on this issue? 4 If the standard were that someone could wait in a case 5 to request documents and then push off depositions by 6 continuing to file new requests, it's apparently -- 7 THE COURT: Yes. I hear you. I understand that 8 point. Look, obviously if there are documents that are covered 9 by the privilege, they have to be identified and logged. So 10 that's the privilege. 11 I don't know, what is this proprietary thing? What is 12 that all about? 13 MS. To the extent she has commercially 14 valuable material that she has written, that's covered by -- 15 it's covered by the protective order basically, that it would 16 be produced in a confidential format with a copyright-protected 17 format. So it is a general objection 18 THE COURT: So she will produce that, she will produce 19 everything -- 20 MS. If she has something like that, yes. 21 Like I said, we produced 3,000 pages yesterday. 22 THE COURT: And calendars and all of the rest of them? 23 MS. To the extent she has any of that, we 24 will produce it, your Honor. 25 THE COURT: All right. In other words, you are going SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588695 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588696 16 G3hdgium 1 to produce everything except anything that you have that you 2 claim privilege as to which you will log? 3 MS. Yes. We have been logging -- 4 THE COURT: Well -- 5 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, on this particular one, 6 she says her client does not have any nonprivileged documents 7 created during the time period responsive to this request, and 8 then there are no privileged documents related to this log on 9 the privilege log. So I don't have any way to read this 10 request in a privilege log and figure out whether there are 11 noncopyright materials that weren't withheld or there are 12 privileged because all of these privileges were raised -- 13 THE COURT: I take it that what's being said is that 14 she has no privileged documents that would be covered by that 15 request? 16 MS. MENNINGER: That's not what the objection says. 17 And, your Honor, since she sold her handwritten notes about my 18 client to Radar Online, I know they exist because they were 19 excerpted on the Internet. 20 THE COURT: Yes, but she said she doesn't have them. 21 She said -- I mean, correct me if I am wrong. 22 MS. No, she doesn't have them. But, your 23 Honor, I am happy to have -- first of all, she hasn't conferred 24 on these issues that we are talking about here today. I am 25 happy to address them fully. I feel very comfortable with our SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588697 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588698 17 G3hdgium 1 discovery production in this case. We will continue to roll it 2 out; we have done it timely. Unlike like the defendants, who I 3 served their discovery requests October 27th, your Honor. We 4 are now in March. I received two emails, two emails in 5 response. I produced 3,000 pages -- 6 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, she is 7 (Unintelligible crosstalk) 8 THE COURT: Ladies, we're not going to get anywhere if 9 we "who struck John." 10 MS. I understand, your Honor. 11 I think I proposed something very fair by saying that 12 I would share with her any document I intend to use at that 13 deposition. I just need the deposition. 14 THE COURT: I understand. I got you. OK. 15 Now, you will identify any document -- I mean, you 16 tell them -- give them any documents that you are going to use 17 in the deposition. 18 MS. Yes. 19 THE COURT: OK. Now, is there -- the business of this 20 production on -- you are going to have to -- well, wait a 21 minute. Let me put it this way. The objections to this 16 are 22 overruled except for the privilege. OK? 23 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, I've proposed dates for my 24 client to be available in two or three weeks, once we have 25 received a complete document production, which was due last SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588699 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588700 18 G3hdgium 1 night, and I have been told we're not going to talk about dates 2 in two or three weeks. We haven't asked to set them out into 3 May or June. We've just asked for the documents that were due 4 last night to be produced to us before our client's deposition. 5 This isn't some kind of game. It's just she's been litigating 6 this case for seven years -- 7 THE COURT: OK. Well, we've dealt with the first 8 objection. Now, is there another one? 9 MS. Right. So we're here on my motion to 10 compel production of documents. I am just getting a little 11 confused because I don't -- we are here -- my motion to compel 12 production of documents from her based on my request that -- 13 THE COURT: Let's not worry about the -- 14 MS. OK. I just wanted to be clear. I 15 don't have in front of me the request that she is referring to. 16 THE COURT: OK. Anything else that you think you need 17 besides the documents she is going to use, the response to 16? 18 Anything else -- 19 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor -- 20 THE COURT: -- that is critical for the deposition? 21 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, these were filed last 22 night at 9:30 p.m., the 3,000 pages were produced to my office, 23 which is in Colorado. I haven't looked at the 3,000 pages that 24 were produced last night. I will have to ask leave of the 25 Court to go back, look at the documents that were produced and SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588701 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588702 19 G3hdgium 1 see what I am missing. 2 THE COURT: All right. If you want to, you can come 3 back on Thursday next week and we can argue about whether or 4 not the deposition should go forward on Friday. 5 MS. MENNINGER: OK. 6 THE COURT: That is all right with me. 7 MS. MENNINGER: That is acceptable, your Honor. 8 THE COURT: OK. So maybe we've solved that problem. 9 OK. Maybe. 10 Now, on the improper objections by the defendants. I 11 suppose I can assume that the defendants' objections are just 12 exactly the same as the plaintiff's objections. 13 MR. PAGLIUCA: No, your Honor. They are not. 14 MS. Oh, I'm sorry. This is my motion to 15 compel. Can I just address it initially so that I can lay out 16 for the Court what the issues are that we are raising on the 17 motion to compel? 18 THE COURT: I'm sorry. 19 MS. This is my motion to compel now. Can I 20 address -- am I able to address that? 21 THE COURT: Yes. 22 MS. So with respect to our motion to compel 23 the documents from the defendant, as you know, your Honor, 24 there are two main objections that I think have to be overcome 25 in order for us to get that production properly. The first SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588703 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588704 20 G3hdgium 1 main objection is the fact that they are objecting to the time 2 period. So we have sought requests from 1999, which is in 3 around the time when my client contends she was involved with 4 these individuals, to the present. They objected that that 5 time period is overly broad. They only agreed to produce for 6 the period of 1999 to 2002 and for one month, from December 31, 7 2014 to January 31, 2015. So they cut out all the years in 8 between and anything post January 31, 2015. 9 Now, with respect to your Honor maybe saying why would 10 that time period be relevant, the entire time period is 11 relevant for a number of reasons. First, in 1999, that's when 12 my client first recalls being -- 13 THE COURT: We can agree think we can agree at 14 the outset that '99 to what is it? 15 MS. 2002. 16 THE COURT: 2002 is relevant. 17 MS. Right. 18 THE COURT: So what we're talking about is the what 19 happened in 2002? 20 MS. My client was sent to by 21 Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell for a training and to pick up 22 another -- 23 THE COURT: So she is no longer -- 24 MS. And she left. She fled to Australia. 25 THE COURT: OK. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588705 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588706 21 G3hdgium 1 MS. So with respect to these requests, I 2 just want to -- you know, because the Court has mentioned this 3 and it is worthy of referencing, that if you look at the 4 defendants' request to us, they actually request a longer time 5 period; they request from 1996 to the present. So while they 6 don't want us to -- they don't want to produce to us except for 7 that short window, they are requesting the entire period. In 8 some cases they request and I did a chart. Your Honor, 9 would you mind if I just pass this up to you for reference? 10 THE COURT: OK. 11 MS. I did a chart, I believe it is on page 12 10, and it has for you the various requests and what the time 13 periods are, and for many of the requests there is no time 14 period at all. 15 MR. PAGLIUCA: I have it. I don't need it. 16 MS. Oh, you have that? 17 MR. PAGLIUCA: I do not need it. 18 MS. OK. I'm sorry. 19 So that time period shows that many of those requests 20 don't have a time period at all; so it is even broader, from 21 infancy to present. So, in fairness, our requests are 1999 to 22 the present, which we believe is the critical time period. 23 Now, what happens in 2002? So my client does flee to 24 Australia away from these individuals, but the conduct 25 continues. So we have, for example, the law enforcement trash SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588707 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588708 22 G3hdgium 1 pulls that show the message pads of the back and forth of 2 arranging these underaged minors to come for massages, things 3 of that nature. We have the flight logs that show Ms. Maxwell 4 flying 360 times with Jeffrey Epstein, 20 of which were with my 5 client when she was underage. We have the Palm Beach police 6 report, which shows over 30 minors who reported during that 7 time period, to up until now 2006, being abused in that 8 circumstance in Palm Beach. Then we have the arrest that 9 happens of Jeffrey Epstein in 2006. 10 Thereafter, my client in 2008 is -- I'm sorry, she 11 receives from the U.S. government a victim notification letter. 12 At that point, in 2009, Ms. Maxwell's deposition is sought in 13 underlying civil cases. She flees from that deposition, says 14 her mother is ill in England, she has to leave the country, 15 cannot be deposed. She then shows up three weeks later at 16 Chelsea Clinton's wedding. So clearly she was around, she was 17 able to do something, but she avoided that deposition. Her 18 testimony was never taken in that case. 19 So that's in 2009. Then we have in 2011 my client is 20 interviewed by the FBI about the issues that have happened. 21 Then we have in 2011 Ms. Maxwell starts issuing different 22 statements to the press. She continues that, issues a 23 statement in 2015, which is the statement that we are here 24 about in this case. 25 So I contend, your Honor, that all of those years have SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588709 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588710 23 G3hdgium 1 relevant information in them with respect to my client. 2 THE COURT: OK. I understand. 3 Let's hear from the defendant. 4 MR. PAGLIUCA: So, your Honor, I have tried to refrain 5 from responding in kind, but the problem here is all of this -- 6 the agenda behind all of this is not really the issue in this 7 case but it is to make inflammatory statements like counsel 8 just made as fact when they are speculation, at best, your 9 Honor, and to pack into the record things that are demonstrably 10 not true but counsel says them like they are true and then 11 refers to her own declaration to support the fact of what she 12 is saying may or may not be true. So let's get to the issue 13 here in terms of the relevant timeframe. 14 has no contact with 17 Ms. Maxwell or Mr. Epstein. So everything that happens from 18 2002 forward has absolutely nothing to do with the plaintiff in 19 this case, and she has absolutely no personal knowledge about 20 what did or didn't happen in Florida or elsewhere from that 21 timeframe forward. 22 You know, I carefully, your Honor, read your ruling on 23 the motion to dismiss, and I believe that you characterized the 24 issue in this case very narrowly, and that is is what the 25 plaintiff said about Ms. Maxwell, and from 1999 to 2002, true SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588711 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588712 24 G3hdgium 1 or not. Those two individuals have the facts that relate to 2 that, and anything outside of that, quite frankly, is opinion 3 and not a subject matter of this litigation. 4 Now, you have to focus not only on this expansive 5 timeframe in which the plaintiff is not even in this 6 hemisphere, which is combined with the overbroad requests that 7 don't ask for things that might be arguably relevant under a 8 404(b) analysis -- you know, for example, did this happen with 9 Ms. Maxwell and someone else in 2005, let's say -- those aren't 10 what the requests are. The requests are for all communications 11 for 17 years with plug in the individual, all documents 12 relating to whatever you want to plug in there for 17 years. 13 And so those two things combined create a grossly overbroad and 14 unmanageable document request. Hence, the objections. 15 Now, had we had the ability to confer about this, we 16 may have been able to get down to, here, these are really the 17 relevant timeframes, or you need to modify your requests for 18 production to say things like any communication with Jeffrey 19 Epstein related to the plaintiff, any communication with this 20 person related to the plaintiff. But that's not what the 21 requests are. And so what you are left with is an unmanageable 22 pile of requests for production of documents. 23 I will note, your Honor, so the Court has this in 24 context, there are 39 requests that have been proposed to 25 Ms. Maxwell. She has no responsive documents, and I've so SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588713 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588714 25 G3hdgium 1 indicated to 17 of those requests. So we then winnow this down 2 to the ones that we are objecting to for very good reason. The 3 timeframe we have proposed is the appropriate timeframe. If 4 there are narrowly tailored requests for production for 5 something that may be relevant outside that timeframe, then 6 they should propose that and not what they are proposing 7 currently, which makes the entire process unwieldy and 8 unreliable. 9 MS. Your Honor, the underlying issue in 10 this case is whether or not Ms. Maxwell lied when she said my 11 client was not subject to the abuse that she said she was 12 subject to. So in order to prove that, for defamation with 13 malice, we have to prove that my client was abused by these 14 individuals, that these individuals did take advantage of her 15 in the way that she expressed. 16 What's relevant to that is the sexual trafficking 17 ring. If after my client left they are also trafficking other 18 underaged girls repetitively, that is relevant to prove the 19 truth of my client's allegations as well. We are entitled to 20 that in discovery, your Honor. One of the requests is the 21 documents relating to communications of Jeffrey Epstein. If 22 she is e-mailing Jeffrey Epstein about the girls she's going to 23 send over to him in 2004, before he is arrested, that's 24 relevant to my client's claim, your Honor. So we shouldn't be 25 told that we're not entitled to these documents or that we're SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588715 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588716 26 G3hdgium 1 only entitled to two emails out of all of our requests. 2 In addition, he says that there are 17 requests that 3 they have no documents for, your Honor, but, again, they have 4 restricted the time period to this very short window and then 5 they answered in their responses. OK. So -- 6 MR. PAGLIUCA: That is not true. If you read -- 7 actually read the response, there is no restriction because we 8 have looked and there are no documents. We're actually trying 9 to move this ball forward, your Honor, and what's happening 10 here is we keep getting sucked back into this morass of maybe 11 something happened. If you listen to the words that counsel is 12 saying, your Honor, it is very illustrative of the fishing 13 expedition. If there is this, then it is relevant. But that 14 is not what they are asking for. And you have to go back to 15 the request. "All documents" -- Request No. 1: "All documents 16 relating to communications with Jeffrey Epstein from 1990 to 17 present." Well, that's not all documents concerning 18 trafficking or underaged girls, that's all documents relating 19 to, which could be anything in the universe. 20 Those are the reasons why I objected. 21 Request No. 3: "All documents relating to 22 communications with Andrew Albert Christian Edward, Duke of 23 York, from 1990 to present." You know, what the heck does a 24 communication with the Duke in 2013, any old communication, 25 have to do with anything in this case? Nothing. If you SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588717 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588718 27 G3hdgium 1 said -- if you give me a request for production of documents 2 that said give me any documents that talk about your press 3 release with the Duke, well, that might be relevant and 4 discoverable, but these are grossly overbroad. 5 If they had conferred with us, we would have been able 6 to narrow this down, but they haven't because there is an 7 agenda here that, quite frankly, I don't understand, your 8 Honor. But what I think it is is to simply pack the record, 9 the written record and the oral record, with these very 10 specious, quite frankly, disgusting allegations about my 11 client, and that's not what we're here for. If they want 12 something, they should ask for it specifically. If they just 13 want to, you know, kind of throw things around -- if this, then 14 that -- then that's what we're about here. 15 MS. Your Honor -- 16 THE COURT: All right. I think I understand this 17 issue. 18 What else do we have? We have the timeframe and the 19 specificity. 20 MS. Right. So, your Honor, there is the 21 timeframe for the request, and then, right, I assume that they 22 are alleging that these are overbroad in some way as 23 THE COURT: I would rather think I just heard that. 24 MS. Right. Exactly. So, your Honor, just 25 to touch on that very quickly. Not only -- and you will see it SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588719 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588720 28 G3hdgium 1 in our papers, but we also give specific examples of why these 2 are relevant, for example, and not overbroad. For example, two 3 of the people we asked for documents and communications with, 4 and when they were asked in 5 their depositions about Ms. Maxwell sexually trafficking 6 underaged girls, both of those individuals took the Fifth. If 7 there are documents between Ms. Maxwell and 8 discussing those issues at any time from 1990 to present, we 9 want those documents, your Honor. And while they say that 10 day-to-day communications with Jeffrey Epstein wouldn't be 11 relevant, they would. If they're communicating on a daily 12 basis, that's relevant. 13 THE COURT: I understand that point. 14 MS. So, your Honor, those are the two key 15 issues as I understand it, the time period and then the 16 overbreadth of the request, that they have been objecting to. 17 And, your Honor, we just obviously want discovery in 18 this case to move it forward. 19 THE COURT: All right. So we've got that. I 20 understand that. Is there any other broad category? 21 MS. No. Those are the two issues, as I 22 understand it, the date range which they've limited -- 23 THE COURT: If we resolve those two, have we resolved 24 the objections to the document demand? 25 MS. That's my understanding, that they SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588721 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588722 29 G3hdgium 1 should be producing at that point. 2 THE COURT: All right. 3 MR. PAGLIUCA: Well, there are privilege issues that 4 remain unresolved. 5 THE COURT: No. We're going to deal with the 6 privilege issues. 7 MR. PAGLIUCA: I just didn't want you to think 8 THE COURT: No. I would be pleased to hear anybody if 9 they want to be heard on my proposal on the privilege -- 10 MR. PAGLIUCA: No. I think that is fine, your Honor. 11 I just didn't want to let that be unsaid. 12 The other thing I need to add in this discussion, 13 though, your Honor, is this. You know, the plaintiff 14 repeatedly now tries to distance herself from her own requests 15 for production by comparing, for example, the timeframe at 16 issue to the timeframe that Ms. Maxwell believes the plaintiff 17 should be responding to. 18 THE COURT: OK. All right. We'll take a short 19 recess. 20 (Recess) 21 THE COURT: Please be seated. Thank you very much. 22 The motion is granted and denied. Does that help? 23 MR. PAGLIUCA: Perfect, your Honor. 24 THE COURT: Let's do this. This is an effort to keep 25 this going forward. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588723 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588724 30 G3hdgium 1 I think a blanket coverage of all documents is too 2 broad. I think the period is relevant I mean, it could be 3 relevant. I don't say it is but it could be relevant. So the 4 period is all right, that is, the 2000 and later. I think any 5 documents with named individuals, that's fine. 6 As to "too broad categories," here's my problem and 7 maybe you can help me. Any documents which relate to any 8 activity of the defendant with respect to the practice which 9 has been alleged. Now, I don't want to try to define what that 10 is, and I hope you all today will define that. And then I 11 would say any documents that relate to the duties to be 12 performed by Maxwell. And it may be that there are other 13 definitional categories that would be appropriate but they 14 don't occur to me at the moment. 15 Now, let me ask the plaintiff, how do you want to 16 define the activities? 17 MS. I'm comfortable defining "activities," 18 your Honor. I think you said any documents which relate to the 19 activities of defendant with respect to the practice, which we 20 would say would be sexual abuse or trafficking of minors. 21 THE COURT: OK. 22 MS. And I think that everybody has an 23 understanding of what that is. So if there is emails about 24 girls getting massages for those sorts of -- 25 THE COURT: All right. So what do you all think about SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588725 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588726 31 G3hdgium 1 that? 2 MR. PAGLIUCA: If we're limiting it to minors, which I 3 understand this to be limited to, I think that's fine. I mean, 4 we are talking about -- the allegation in this case is, 5 according to is that she was an underaged minor, 6 trafficked individual, and my client has vehemently denied that 7 in the press and here. And so that's the issue. And I think 8 if that's what we are talking about, we are fine with that. 9 MS. Your Honor, can I just clarify really 10 quickly? 11 There was trafficking of both underaged and women that 12 were over 18. So I wouldn't feel comfortable limiting it to 13 just the minors, under 18. 14 MR. PAGLIUCA: You can't traffic somebody -- 15 MS. You can prosecute someone over 16 international lines, and that is a federal offense if they 17 are -- 18 THE COURT: Let's -- 19 MR. PAGLIUCA: That's not the definition. 20 THE COURT: Let me -- if we skip the minors, what 21 would it be? It would be any yes, it would be any 22 MS. Females. 23 THE COURT: The documents relating to trafficking, 24 what for? 25 MS. Sexual trafficking or sexual abuse of SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588727 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588728 32 G3hdgium 1 any female. 2 THE COURT: That is OK. 3 MR. PAGLIUCA: To be clear, we talking about something 4 that is illegal, right? 5 THE COURT: Are we? I don't think it has to be 6 illegal in the context of the defamation. 7 MR. PAGLIUCA: Let me sort of recap, your Honor. 8 Because the defamation is that was a minor and from 9 1999 to 2002 somehow was, quote-unquote, sexually trafficked. 10 THE COURT: Your client's statement is that she was a 11 liar and -- I mean, I don't mean to prejudge that, but I mean 12 that's the issue as I understand it. 13 MR. PAGLIUCA: Well, and the Court narrowed this down 14 in the Court's order on the motion to dismiss, which is that 15 the statements relating to Ms. Maxwell's participation in the 16 trafficking of the plaintiff were untrue or unfounded. Those 17 are the statements. 18 THE COURT: OK. 19 MS. Yes. 20 THE COURT: Then I think it is conceivable that it 21 wouldn't be limited to minors. What I'm trying to say is if 22 there were trafficking other than with minors, that might also 23 be relevant to the existence of the practice. 24 MS. Exactly. 25 THE COURT: OK. So it isn't limited to minors. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588729 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588730 33 G3hdgium 1 MS. Thank you, your Honor. 2 THE COURT: Anything else? 3 MS. No, your Honor. I just wanted to have 4 an understanding, because maybe I'm not a quick study, but as 5 to what your ruling is with respect to the deposition? I 6 understand that I agreed to waive any -- 7 THE COURT: Where we are is the deposition is going 8 forward. If they want to come forward and seek to adjourn it, 9 I will hear it next Thursday. 10 MS. OK. So it is set for Friday. If they 11 come to you on Thursday, we argue about that? 12 THE COURT: Yes. 13 MS. But it is going forward on Friday? 14 THE COURT: Yes. 15 MS. Thank you, your Honor. 16 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, with respect to the 17 document responses and production that we received last night, 18 I would ask the Court for an expedited briefing schedule so 19 that can be heard next Thursday as well. 20 THE COURT: Sure. 21 MS. MENNINGER: Because I have looked at them and I 22 think that there are some very facially invalid 23 THE COURT: Sure. That is fine. 24 MS. MENNINGER: responses. 25 THE COURT: That is OK. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588731 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588732 10 11 12 13 14 34 G3hdgium 1 MS. MENNINGER: So I would ask your Honor -- it is 2 Thursday now I would ask, if I could, to file the motion 3 I mean, we're not going to have-- 4 THE COURT: By noon Wednesday? 5 MS. MENNINGER: By 6 be back to your Honor on Thursday. 7 THE COURT: Yes. noon on Wednesday, and then we'll 8 MS. Can I have it on Tuesday so I can 9 respond, or no? THE COURT: Well, it's a short fuse. All right. I would say by close of business -- if you make whatever you want to do with that by the close of business on Tuesday instead of noon Wednesday, that gives you -- I just cheated you out of -- I did a good thing. I did a good thing. I permitted you to 15 have a nice night's sleep on Tuesday. 16 MS. MENNINGER: And, your Honor, I think if I heard 17 your Honor correctly, that if we had other issues with respect 18 to our client's deposition, we could raise those and have that 19 for next Thursday as well? 20 21 Listen, I can't prevent lawyers from making mistakes -- or, 22 excuse me, making motions. So do whatever you -- 23 MS. MENNINGER: As much as you might like to. 24 THE COURT: So do whatever you want to do. 25 MS. MENNINGER: All right. Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Yeah, but it's going to be -- yes. Sure. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588733 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588734 35 G3hdgium 1 THE COURT: Anything else? 2 MS. That's it, your Honor. Thank you. 3 THE COURT: Do you think the four of us are going to 4 survive this experience? 5 MS. I think so, your Honor. 6 THE COURT: Yeah? OK. Let's hope so. 7 MS. Thank you, your Honor. 8 THE COURT: Anything else? 9 MS. In a period of time. 10 MR. PAGLIUCA: Nothing further, your Honor. 11 THE COURT: OK. Thanks. 12 13 - - - 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. EFTA00588735 (212) 805-0300 EFTA00588736