DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00802.png

Case 18-2868, Document 279, 08/09/2019, 2628231, Page20 of 37 “Tplaintiff’s] claims are obvious lies”—also is indefinite and ambiguous. An “obvious lie” to one person is not an “obvious lie” to another. Factor 2: Capable of being characterized as true or false. On the 12(b)(6) record, the Court held the three statements “are capable of being proven true or false.” Doc.37 at 9. As a general question of law, one person’s statement that another person’s allegations are “untrue” or are “obvious lies” is not necessarily capable of being proved true or false—regardless of the subject matter of the opined “untruths” or “lies.” See Rizzuto v. Nexxus Prod. Co., 641 F. Supp. 473, 481 (S.D.N.Y. 1986), aff'd, 810 F.2d 1161 (2d Cir. 1986); Telephone Sys. Int’l v. Cecil, No. 02 CV 9315(GBD), 2003 WL 22232908, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 29, 2003); Memo. of Law 35 (citing cases). As Steinhilber observed, “even apparent statements of fact may assume the character of statements of opinion, and thus be privileged.” 501 N.E.2d at 556. At least two of plaintiff's CVRA allegations cannot be proven true or false (only two such allegations are needed in order to render the January 15 statement an opinion). We have identified two such allegations in the joinder motion: that Ms. Maxwell “appreciated the immunity granted” to Epstein, and that she “act[ed] as a ‘madame’ for Epstein.” Memo. of Law 22. Plaintiff does not dispute this. The result is that the January 15 statement’s assertion that plaintiff's “allegations” and “claims” in the joint motion are “untrue” or “obvious lies” is by definition an opinion. It cannot be proven true or false whether Ms. Maxwell “appreciated” Epstein’s immunity or whether she “acted as a madame.” Indeed, it seems quite obvious that the joinder-motion allegations about “appreciation” and “madame” are themselves opinion. In the statement, Mr. Barden on behalf of Ms. Maxwell also says plaintiff's “original allegations . . . have been fully responded to and shown to be untrue.” Doc.542-6, Ex.F. This cannot be proven true or false. The “full response” to the original allegations is a reference to the “Statement on Behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell” issued March 9, 2011, in response to plaintiffs 15