Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
Cy
HADDON
MORGAN
FOREMAN
December 8, 2021
VIA Email
The Honorable Alison J. Nathan
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
40 Foley Square
New York, NY 10007
Document 532
Filed 12/09/21 Pagelof8
Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C
Jeffrey S. Pagliuca
150 East 10th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80203
PH 303.831.7364
FX 303.832.2628
www.hmflaw.com
[email protected]
Re: — United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Dear Judge Nathan,
This is at least the third attempt by the government to admit an unreliable exhibit of
unknown origin. The problems are manifold, as this Court is aware.
When the government last sought admission, after the testimony of Juan Alessi, this
Court reserved ruling, recognizing that Mr. Alessi had neither authenticated Exhibit 52 nor laid
the required foundation for its admission under Rule 803(6).
Rest assured, promised the government, it would fill in the blanks through the testimony
of Employee-1. But the government no longer plans to call Employee-1 as a witness, so it’s left
with a record this Court already deemed inadequate to justify admission of the exhibit.
Undeterred, the government now, for the very first time, points to something else—Ms.
Maxwell’s April 2016 civil deposition. The government claims that Ms. Maxwell’s deposition
testimony authenticates Exhibit 52.
The government is wrong, for at least two obvious reasons. First, the exhibit Ms.
Maxwell was shown in her deposition (Deposition Exhibit 13) is not the same thing as Exhibit
DOJ-OGR-00008265