DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00864.png

Case 18-2868, Document 280, 08/09/2019, 2628232, Page45 of 74 bearing in mind that Ms. Maxwell, I think was in New York then, she was five hours behind, so there was quite a lot of, sort of time difference between the various countries here, I sent her an email, I believe, saying - parsing this-- forwarding this email to her saying “How do you wish to proceed?” And then I was on the telephone-- I had two telephones in the car, I received in excess of 30 phone calls from various media outlets on th® 2nd of January, all asking for information about how Ms. Maxwell was looking to respond to the latest court filings, which were filed on the 30th of December as I understand. And by close-- towards close of play on the 2nd, I received an email forwarded by Ms. Maxwell, containing a draft statement which my understanding was the majority of which had been drafted by Mr. Barden with a header along the lines of “This is the agreed statement.”- At close of play on th® 2nd. So-I was-I had gone under the Channel Tunnel and I was sitting on the other side and that email, which my understanding was that it had been signed off by the client, effectively, was then sent out to a number of media, including Mr. Ball and various other UK newspapers. Q. Mr. Gow, when you say “end of play” and “close of play,” are you referring to sending the email that is Exhibit 2? A. Yes, lam eK Q. The subject line does have “FW” which to me indicates it’s a forward. Do you know where the rest of this email chain is? A. My understanding of this is: It was a holiday in the UK, but Mr. Barden was not necessarily accessible at some point in time, so this had been sent to him originally by Ms. Maxwell, and because he was unavailable, she forwarded it to me for immediate action. I therefore respond, “Okay, Ghislaine, I'll go with this.” It is my understanding that this is the agreed statement because the subject of the second one is “Urgent, this is the statement” so I take that as an instruction to send it out, as a positive command: “This is the statement.” Accordingly, record evidence shows that the press release was intended as press release, and not as a “legal argument.” Record evidence also establishes that Defendant circulated the press release to Barden and Gow, and then gave a “positive command” to Gow to publish it. Additionally, there is no indicia that the press release is a legal opinion. To the contrary, it was issued by, and specifically attributed to, a woman who has personal knowledge of whether Ms. Giuffre’s claims of sexual abuse are true, and she states that Ms. Giuffre is a liar.“* At the very least, all of these factual issues must be considered by a jury. *® See McCawley Dec. at Exhibit 6, Ross Gow Dep. Tr. at 14:15-17; 31:19-33:7; 44:6-45:13 (emphasis added). “ Unsurprisingly, Defendant cites no case law to support her argument that her attorney’s alleged influence in preparing the statement Defendant issued to the media somehow shields her from liability. 37