Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch7_p00218.png

20 Za 22 23 24 25 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1332-10 Filed 01/08/24 Page 21 of 64 20 H2G8GIUC It loses on the first issue because it has not produced any admissible evidence that Ms. Maxwell or her agent had any control or authority over the media or making a decision about the republication of the quotable statement. On the second issue, with regard to excerpts, we pointed out that, as bad as it is to hold a defendant liable for the republication of a statement, it must ever so be wrong to make that defendant liable for someone else's decision to republish portions of a statement she has issued. Now, the New York state law on this is set out in the Rand v. New York Times case. The undisputed facts with regard to this second point with regard to republication, Judge, is that Mr. Barton drafted the bulk of this statement. If you look at the Barton declaration, paragraphs 13 to 20, this makes it absolutely clear. I understand from the plaintiff that there is some dispute about whether Mr. Barton drafted the bulk of the statement. That's not true at all. If the Court looks at the papers cited by the response, there is no contradiction of Mr. Barton's testimony. Mr. Barton said that, I drafted the vast majority of it. He said that it's possible that someone else may have contributed, but, ultimately, I'm the one who drafted it, and I adopted all of these statements in the January 2015 statement. It is undisputed, Judge, that Mr. Barton's purposes in drafting the statement on behalf of Ms. Maxwell was two-fold: SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300