DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00921.png

Case 18-2868, Document 281, 08/09/2019, 2628234, Page28 of 66 DEFENDANT’S PURPORTED FACTS 33. In none of the nine instances was there any publication of the entire January 2015 statement. MS. GIUFFRE’S STATEMENT CONTROVERTING DEFENDANT’S FACTS While there may be certain publications who did not print every word of Defendant’s lengthy press release, most publications quoted the most salient, to-the-point parts of Defendant’s statement that call Ms. Giuffre a liar. In each of the nine articles listed above, the defamatory statement, as articulated by the Complaint and as identified by the Court as actionable, is published. See Giuffre v. Maxwell, 165 F. Supp.3d 147, 152 (S.D.N.Y. 2016) (“statements that Giuffre’s claims ‘against [Defendant] are untrue,’ have been ‘shown to be untrue,’ and are ‘obvious lies’ have a specific and readily understood factual meaning: that Giuffre is not telling the truth about her history of sexual abuse and Defendant’s role, and that some verifiable investigation has occurred and come to a definitive conclusion proving that fact. Second, these statements (as they themselves allege), are capable of being proven true or false, and therefore constitute actionable fact and not opinion’). Ms. Giuffre also put forth extensive evidence of the mass distribution of Defendant’s defamatory statement to over 66 million viewers through her expert witness Jim Jansen. See McCawley Dec. at Exhibit 24, Expert Report of Jim Jansen. DEFENDANT’S PURPORTED FACTS 34. Ms. Maxwell and her agents exercised no control or authority over any media organization, including the media identified in Ms. Giuffre’s response to Interrogatory No. 6, in connection with the media’s publication of portions of the January 2015 statement. MS. GIUFFRE’S STATEMENT CONTROVERTING DEFENDANT’S FACTS Ms. Giuffre disputes this statement in its entirety, as it is completely devoid of record evidence. In fact, the record establishes the contrary. First, Defendant hired Gow because his 28