Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch7_p00234.png

20 Za 22 23 24 25 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1332-10 Filed 01/08/24 Page 37 of 64 36 H2G8GIUC try to fend off the allegations he believes are false on behalf of his client, and on the other hand, to tell the media, you republish her false allegations at your peril. That is the context of that statement. As I say, Judge, you don't need Mr. Barton to take a look at the statement and see what he was building there. He is building a syllogism. He is trying to persuade the media don't republish the plaintiff's statements. As a side note, Judge, on the question of republication, you will note that Mr. Barton gets it right. Mr. Barton doesn't say, if you republish plaintiff's allegations, we are going to sue the plaintiff. He doesn't say that. He says, in the fourth paragraph of the January 2015 statement, if you republish the plaintiff's false allegations, we are going to sue you, the plaintiff. The January 2015 statement is not issued to the plaintiff, although she would certainly be a critical witness if Mr. Barton were to sue the media. Let's get to the last factor, Judge. The last factor is a broader setting, and the broader setting as applicable to our motion for summary judgment has to do with the question of to whom this January 2015 statement was issued. It was issued to 6 to 30 media. It doesn't really matter what the number is. It could be one, it could be eight, it could be 100 newspaper reporters. The point is that it was issued to this audience, and the audience of reporters, not to the general public. It SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300