Ghislaine Maxwell wants a civil judge to punish federal prosecutors for looking up Epstein’s classified files

NEW YORK - DECEMBER 8: Socialite Ghislane Maxwell attends the Opening of the Asprey Flagship Store on 5th Avenue December 8, 2003 in New York City. (Photo by Mark Mainz/Getty Images)

Pensacola, Fl

Geoffrey Epstein’s ex-girlfriend and alleged designer Ghislaine Maxwell wants the judge to prevent federal prosecutors from using information obtained from a segment that has long sought Epstein’s secret files. Maxwell also believed that prosecutors should be punished for accessing these files in the first place.

In a written letter to the US District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), Maxwell Taiji’s lawyer asked US District Judge Loretta Prisca to “justify her protective order and punish for his violation.”

According to this recording, two texts of the deposition previously marked as “secret” were subject to the terms of this order.

“Both texts are in the hands of the government, which they used to file an indictment against Mrs. Maxwell, and accusing her, among other things, of perjury in a testimony of her sediment,” the movement notes. “This is a serious violation of the order of protection and deserves the commencement of procedures to violate the sanctity of the court.

Remember that Maxwell is currently involved in two general legal battles: (1) a protection order issued in 2015 by Judge Robert W. Sweet that includes Epstein files in a defamation case that has since been settled between Epstein survivor Virginia Roberts Geoffrey and Maxwell; And (2) the criminal sex trafficking case brought by federal prosecutors.

The order to protect against Giuffre against Maxwell is the main legal obstacle preventing the release of those files that are suspected of embarrassing those alleged to have participated in the sex ring in Epstein. The disclosure process for some of these documents reached many years, and the first versions were identified.

Included in this first list of potential missile documents is one of the documentation referred to by Maxwell’s attorney. However, the oath of the preceding precedent gave Epstein two filings that were subject to the terms of the protection order, however, the government allegedly relied on them to formulate her criminal charges.

According to the movement, in length:

Quoted literally from Ms. Maxwell’s demarcation version, the indictment alleges that Ms. Maxwell provided false testimony (A) when she testified “I don’t know what you are talking about” in response to a question whether Mr. Epstein “was [d] a plan to recruit underage girls for massage Sexual … [i] if you know “; And (b) when she testified, “I am not aware of anyone who interacted with him [other than the plaintiff] and he was 17 years old at this point.” None of these questions and answers were used in the summary or ruling papers issued by the Second Chamber. The text containing this certificate is stamped.

And the recording continues: “There were only two parties – the prosecutor and Mrs. Maxwell – and their attorneys were entitled to access the texts of Ms. Maxwell’s statement.” The texts, which were classified as “secret”, were the subject of the protection order, which strictly limits the persons to whom the parties may disclose specific “secret” documents.

Since these filings were accessed by the government in violation of the protection order, J. argues, Judge Prisca must compel criminal prosecutors of SDNY to stop relying on the information in the statement and suffer additional consequences as well.

“We respectfully provide that if the court finds a violation of the protection order, this court must direct the government to return any copies of the filing records to the court and enter an order to show the reason of the person (s) who violated the Maxwell attorney asked the court.

In other words, Maxwell wants the judge in the ongoing civil case involving the release of Epstein’s files to stop the government from using some of these files in criminal prosecution against her – and she wants to keep the secrecy system longer for the alleged misconduct. But does she have a chance here?

Miami journalist Herald Jolly K. Brown – whose pioneering work was the indirect reason for the interest of the entire legal system in Epstein and Maxwell – asked a related question on Twitter. “Does a safeguard stand when the information you are trying to hide (protect it) is part of a crime?” She asked.

The consensus is that Maxwell has no chance.

Lawyer George Conway replied, “No judge will uphold the matter of protecting civil suits against a criminal investigation.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here