Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch3_p00259.png

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1327-19 Filed 01/05/24 Page 16 of 21 See (DE 280-2), Palm Beach County State Attorney’s Office, Public Records Request No.: 16- 268, Disc 7 at p. 2305 (GIUFFRE007843) Because of Defendant’s refusal to search this important email account, any production yielded from any search terms will necessarily be incomplete. Indeed, this failure is particularly prejudicial, as this account appears to be the one she used while she was with Epstein, and therefore, the one she used during the time period Defendant was abusing Ms. Giuffre. Defendant does not appear to have pursued access to this account very far. This inaction lies in stark contrast to Ms. Giuffre’s efforts to recover data. Ms. Giuffre has sent executed releases to Microsoft for her inaccessible account, and even issued a Rule 45 Subpoena to Microsoft for the production of her account data. See McCawley Decl. at Exhibit 9, Microsoft Subpoena. At a minimum, the Court should direct the Defendant to take these steps to access the earthlink.net email account. D. An Adverse Inference Instruction is Appropriate. In light of this clear and persistent pattern of recalcitrance, the Court should instruct the jury that it can draw an adverse inference that the Defendant has concealed relevant evidence. Defendant has yet to provide responsive information. And even if Defendant were, at this late date, to run Ms. Giuffre’s proposed search terms over her data (which has not yet been collected), such a production would be both untimely and prejudicial. Fact discovery has closed. Numerous depositions have already been taken by Ms. Giuffre without the benefit of these documents. The window for authenticating the documents through depositions has shut. Expert reports are due at the end of the month, and Ms. Giuffre’s experts do not have the benefit of reviewing these documents. Late production of information robs Ms. Giuffre of any practical ability to use the discovery. 16