DOJ-OGR-00002353(2).jpg
537 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal motion / court filing
File Size:
537 KB
Summary
This document is Page 6 of a legal filing (Motion to Suppress) from the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330). Maxwell's defense argues that Counts Five and Six (perjury charges) should be dismissed because they rely on evidence obtained through an unlawful grand jury subpoena that violated a Protective Order in the civil case 'Giuffre v. Maxwell'. The document asserts the government proceeded 'ex parte' to avoid contestation.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant |
Moving to suppress evidence and dismiss Counts Five and Six of the indictment.
|
| Giuffre | Plaintiff (Civil Case) |
Mentioned in case citation Giuffre v. Maxwell (Virginia Giuffre).
|
| AJN | Judge |
Initials in case number 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (Judge Alison J. Nathan).
|
| LAP | Judge |
Initials in case number 15-cv-7433 (LAP) (Judge Loretta A. Preska).
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Boies Schiller |
Law firm that conducted the civil depositions in the defamation action against Maxwell.
|
|
| Government |
The prosecution/DOJ, accused of issuing an unlawful subpoena.
|
|
| S.D.N.Y |
Southern District of New York (Court jurisdiction).
|
Timeline (2 events)
2021-02-04
Filing of Motion to Suppress Evidence and Dismiss Counts Five and Six.
S.D.N.Y
Civil depositions conducted by Boies Schiller where Maxwell allegedly committed perjury.
Unknown
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Southern District of New York (Court location).
|
Relationships (2)
Giuffre v. Maxwell, Case No. 15-cv-7433
Depositions conducted by Boies Schiller in a defamation action it filed against Maxwell
Key Quotes (4)
"Ghislaine Maxwell moves to suppress all evidence the government obtained from a grand jury subpoena it issued to [REDACTED] and to dismiss Counts Five and Six, which are the fruits of that unlawful subpoena."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002353(2).jpg
Quote #1
"Counts Five and Six allege that Maxwell committed perjury during two civil depositions conducted by Boies Schiller in a defamation action..."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002353(2).jpg
Quote #2
"A Protective Order entered in that case prohibited the parties and their lawyers from sharing confidential discovery material... with anyone else, including with the government and law enforcement."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002353(2).jpg
Quote #3
"By proceeding ex parte, the government ensured that no one before the court would be able to contest the accuracy of its representations in support of its application."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002353(2).jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,212 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 134 Filed 02/04/21 Page 6 of 23
Ghislaine Maxwell moves to suppress all evidence the government obtained from a grand jury subpoena it issued to [REDACTED] and to dismiss Counts Five and Six, which are the fruits of that unlawful subpoena.
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT
Counts Five and Six allege that Maxwell committed perjury during two civil depositions conducted by Boies Schiller in a defamation action it filed against Maxwell on behalf of one of the firm’s clients. Giuffre v. Maxwell, Case No. 15-cv-7433 (LAP) (S.D.N.Y). A Protective Order entered in that case prohibited the parties and their lawyers from sharing confidential discovery material (including the two Maxwell depositions) with anyone else, including with the government and law enforcement. Faced with that Protective Order, the government issued a [REDACTED]
[REDACTED]. By proceeding ex parte, the government ensured that no one before the court would be able to contest the accuracy of its representations in support of its application.
The government then took full advantage. [REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED].
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED].
1
DOJ-OGR-00002353
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document