DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00863.png

Case 18-2868, Document 280, 08/09/2019, 2628232, Page44 of 74 finding as to what Mr. Barden’s intent really was. Finding about intent are inappropriate at the summary judgment stage, as this Court and the Second Circuit have recognized. This Court has explained, “if it is necessary to resolve inferences regarding intent, summary judgment is not appropriate.” Id. (Sweet, J.) (emphasis added), citing Patrick v. Le Fevre, 745 F.2d 153, 159 (2d Cir. 1984); Friedman v. Meyers, 482 F.2d 435, 439 (2d Cir. 1973) (other citations omitted). c. There are factual disputes regarding Barden’s Declaration. Finally, there are material disputes over the statements in the Barden Declaration because they are directly refuted by record evidence. For example, the instant motion and the Barden Declaration describe the press release merely as a document expressing “his [Mr. Bardent’s] opinion — in the form of a legal argument —as a lawyer would be,” as opposed to a press release for dissemination by the media to the public. Record evidence refutes this claim, as (1) the press release was sent to journalists, not media publishers or in-house counsel; (2) the press release instructed the journalists to publish the defamatory statement (“Please find attached a quotable statement on behalf of Ms. Maxwell”); (3) it was issued by a publicist on Defendant’s behalf and not by an attorney, without any reference to attorneys or laws — indeed, Gow testified that Barden was unavailable to approve the statement; and (4) Gow testified that he issued the statement only after he understood Defendant to have “signed off” it, an understanding he formed based on Defendant’s “positive command” to him: “This is the agreed statement.” Q. When you sent that email were you acting pursuant to Ms. Maxwell’s retention of your services? A. Yes, I was. eK Q. When you say “agreed statement” can you tell me more about what you mean? Who agreed to the statement? A. I need to give you some context, if I may, about that statement. So, this is on New Year’s Day. I was in France so the email time here of 21:46, in French time was 22:46, and I was getting up early the next morning to drive my family back from the south of France to England, which is a 14-hour journey, door to door. So on the morning of th® 2nd of January, 36