DocumentCloud_Epstein_Docs_p00924.png

Case 18-2868, Document 281, 08/09/2019, 2628234, Page31 of 66 MS. GIUFFRE’S STATEMENT CONTROVERTING DEFENDANT’S FACTS Agreed. However, in discovery, Defendant was finally forced to produce the complete press release she issued. See McCawley Dec. at Exhibit 26, GIUFFRE00068. DEFENDANT’S PURPORTED FACTS 37. Ms. Giuffre lived independently from her parents with her fiancé long before meeting Epstein or Ms. Maxwell. After leaving the Growing Together drug rehabilitation facility in 1999, Ms. Giuffre moved in with the family of a fellow patient. There she met, and became engaged to, her friend’s brother, James Michael Austrich. She and Austrich thereafter rented an apartment in the Ft. Lauderdale area with another friend and both worked at various jobs in that area. Later, they stayed briefly with Ms. Giuffre’s parents in the Palm Beach/ Loxahatchee, Florida area before Austrich rented an apartment for the couple on Bent Oak Drive in Royal Palm Beach. Although Ms. Giuffre agreed to marry Austrich, she never had any intention of doing so. MS. GIUFFRE’S STATEMENT CONTROVERTING DEFENDANT’S FACTS Ms. Giuffre did not voluntarily live independently from her parents with her fiancé, rather Ms. Giuffre was a troubled minor child who was not truly engaged prior to meeting Defendant and Epstein. Where Ms. Giuffre lived, and who she lived with, are not relevant to the issues being decided in this action. Again, this is merely a transparent distraction from the case that is actually at issue, and is being used for the sole purpose of inserting conjecture in an effort to distract the Court and ultimately the jury. Although Austrich testified that he proposed to Ms. Giuffre on Valentine’s Day, see Austrich at p. 19, Ms. Giuffre was a troubled teen who could not realistically be considered a fiancé in the true sense of the word, nor was she of legal age to marry. In fact, as accurately described by Defendant, Ms. Giuffre never had any intention of marrying Austrich. Giuffre Dep. Tr. at 127:22-128:21. Given that Ms. Giuffre was a child with limited legal capacity at this point, and that she did not have any intention of marrying Austrich, a reasonable person could not assert that Ms. Giuffre was engaged. 31