Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch2_p00019.png

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1325-1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 18 of 21 truth is established. Likewise, it establishes that there can be no damages caused by the alleged defamatory statement. Again, Churcher’s documents and testimony are central to this issue. Cc. Churcher’s information cannot be obtained from an alternative source. Churcher claims that there are other sources for the information sought, citing almost exclusively the Plaintiff as the potential source of information. This argument is flawed for two reasons. First, Plaintiff claims that she does not have much of the information sought, or simply can’t remember. In her deposition, she said she cannot remember where the photograph is, where the contract is, what she told Churcher, and she refused upon advice of counsel, to state what stories Churcher “got wrong.” See Motion to Re-Open Deposition of Plaintiff. Second, as the direct adversary in this case, Plaintiff is not a reliable source for information, and thus cannot be deemed an alternative source. Matter of Sullivan, 167 Misc. 2d 534, 541, 635 N.Y.S.2d 437, 442 (Sup. Ct. 1995) (compelling journalist notes, records, and videotapes of interrogation where claimed alternative source of information — detectives conducting the interrogation — were adversaries and thus could not be deemed the reliable source for information) For most information, Churcher is the only source of the information sought. She is the only person who can provide the following information and documents: e The 24 page fabricated diary, and testimony on when and why it was created? e Notes, transcriptions, tape recordings, and memorandum from her interviews with Plaintiff, including her week long interviews in Australia;® e Churcher’s communications with law enforcement or the FBI concerning Plaintiff,’ 5 Plaintiff contends that she gave the original to Churcher, and did not maintain a copy. Ex B, p. 229. 6 Plaintiff has produced some email communications with Churcher, although in light of Plaintiff's statements concerning the regular deletion of emails, there are likely email communications that were not captured by Plaintiff in Ms. Churcher’s possession or control. Nevertheless, to minimize the burden, Ms. Maxwell will voluntarily limit documents containing communication with Plaintiff by eliminating email communications between Plaintiff and Churcher using Plaintiff’ s xy address. Because Plaintiff did not produce documents from her hotmail account and only recently produced documents from her iCloud account, Ms. Maxwell requests that Churcher search for documents to or from Plaintiff at these two email address. 7 Ms. Maxwell has filed a FOIA request and had not received a response. 16