EFTA00617178

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 
X 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
GHISLAINE MAXWELL 
Defendant. 
X 
15-cv-07433-RWS 
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO OFFER STATEMENTS 
UNDER, IF NECESSARY, THE RESIDUAL HEARSAY RULE 
Laura A. Menninger 
Jeffrey S. Pagliuca 
Ty Gee 
HADDON, MORGAN AND FOREMAN, P.C. 
150 East 10th Avenue 
Denver, CO 80203 
EFTA00617178

Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell ("Ms. Maxwell") hereby files her Response to Plaintiff's 
Notice of Intent to Offer Statements Under, If Necessary, the Residual Hearsay Rule and states 
as follows: 
INTRODUCTION 
Plaintiff is correct that Ms. Maxwell will move, either in limine or at trial, to exclude the 
evidence listed in her notice. Many of the documents identified must be excluded as hearsay 
without applicable exceptions, or based on other evidentiary grounds. Those issues will be 
argued at the appropriate time. For purposes of this Response, Ms. Maxwell simply notes the 
fundamental errors in the Notice, failure to comply with the rules, and general principles that 
make the residual hearsay clause inapplicable. 
I. 
THE RESIDUAL HEARSAY CLAUSE CANNOT BE USED TO CURE 
UNAVAILABLE DECLARANT 
Plaintiff's first fundamental error is her failure of proof that the identified declarants are 
unavailable to be called as witnesses. Fed. R. Evid. 807(a)(3) requires the proponent of hearsay 
to demonstrate that the evidence "is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any 
other evidence that the proponent can obtain through reasonable efforts." Courts routinely forbid 
use of the residual hearsay clause to admit hearsay statements from declarants who are available 
for trial or deposition. Absent evidence to the contrary, the proponent of the proffered evidence 
could obtain the actual declarant to testify testimony either at trial or in deposition by reasonable 
efforts. Elizararras v. Bank of El Paso, 631 F.2d 366 (5th Cir. 1980) (absent showing that bank 
officials could not be procured to testify about certain actions taken with respect to an account, 
testimony of the account holder concerning those actions was not admissible under the residual 
exceptions to the hearsay rule); United States v. Czachorowski, 66 M.J. 432, 436 (C.A.A.F. 
2008) ("courts have found the residual hearsay exception inapplicable when the evidence is not 
1 
EFTA00617179

unreasonably difficult to obtain directly from an available declarant"); United States v. Scrim, 
819 F.2d 996, 1001 (11th Cir. 1987) (holding Fed. R. Evid. 803(24) inapplicable absent showing 
that proponent made reasonable efforts to produce witness with direct, personal knowledge); 
United States v.= 
792 F.2d 1019, 1027 (11th Cir. 1986) (error in the trial court's admission 
of hearsay evidence when the declarant could have been questioned about her own statements); 
As such, Rule 807 is inapplicable to all declarants absent a demonstration that they cannot testify 
directly. 
Such rule makes all the more sense for declarants who actually were deposed in this 
matter or will testify at trial. Plaintiff deposed David Rodgers, 
Juan Alessi 
and Ghislaine Maxwell. Having had the opportunity to question them concerning hearsay 
statements contained in the now proffered documents and to obtain their sworn testimony on 
such matters, Plaintiff should not now be permitted to resort to the improper use of hearsay 
evidence. Likewise, 
will testify at trial, and thus there is no need for her self-
serving hearsay in the form of a heavily-redacted FBI 302 statement, with multiple other 
evidentiary problems as noted in detail below. 
II. 
PLAINTIFF FAILS TO IDENTIFIY THE PARTICULARS OF THE ACTUAL 
DECLARANTS 
Plaintiff acknowledges her duty to provide the "particulars" for each of the hearsay 
statement she presents, including the "declarant's name and address, so that the party has a fair 
opportunity to meet it." She, however, completely fails to provide this information for the vast 
majority of the declarants identified, as demonstrated in the chart below: 
Statement 
Particulars 
Declarant 
Name and 
Address 
Problem with Notice 
Telephone 
Log Book 
Names, 
addresses, 
Alfredo 
Rodriguez 
There is no testimony or other evidence to 
suggest that Mr. Rodriguez is the actual 
2 
EFTA00617180

"Black 
Book" 
phone 
numbers, email 
address, and 
other 
descriptive 
information 
(now 
deceased) 
"declarant" as to the names, addresses, phone 
numbers or any non-handwritten information 
Palm Beach 
Police 
Report 
Statements 
collected 
by the Palm 
Beach 
Police 
Department 
from witnesses 
who 
had been inside 
the 
Epstein 
mansion 
Names of 
witnesses 
listed in the 
re .ort• also 
Plaintiff fails to provide any contact information 
for any of the declarants, and fails to identify 
the witnesses listed in the report with their 
particulars; no basis to claim unavailability as to 
any declarant 
Message 
Pads from 
police trash 
pulls 
Telephone 
memo pads 
indicating calls 
received at the 
Epstein 
residence 
Various 
persons 
completing 
the memo 
pads, 
including 
Ghislaine 
Maxwell 
whose 
addresses or 
attorney is 
known to 
Defendant 
Plaintiff fails to identify each of the declarants 
for whom she seeks to introduce hearsay 
statements; no proof of unavailability. 
Non- 
Prosecution 
Agreement 
Statement of 
particulars of a 
nonprosecution 
agreement 
between 
Jeffrey 
Epstein and the 
U.S. 
Attorney's 
Office for 
Jeffrey 
Epstein, do 
attorney Jack 
Goldberger; 
attorney 
for the U.S. 
Attorney's 
Office for the 
Southern 
The "attorney for the U.S. Attorney's Office for 
the Southern District of Florida" is not properly 
identified, and may not be the only additional 
hearsay declarant as there are likely multiple 
drafters; no proof of unavailability 
3 
EFTA00617181

the Southern 
District of 
Florida Giuffre 
007597-
007605 
District of 
Florida 
Justice 
Department 
Victim 
Notification 
Statement to 
that 
she had been 
identified 
as a victim 
do 
U.S. 
Attorney's 
Office, 
Southern 
District of
Florida 
Declarant not fully identified; likely additional 
declarants, including the declarant who 
provided ant purported "identification"; no 
proof of unavailability 
FBI 302 of 
interview 
of 
to FBI 
reporting 
sexual abuse 
Ms. 
FBI 
Agent name 
redacted, do 
FBI Office 
Unidentified "redacted" FBI Agent name is not 
properly identified; no proof of unavailability 
Deposition 
of Juan 
Allessi 
(2009) 
Statements 
re ardin 
presence at 
Epstein's 
home, 
massages 
given to girls 
and young 
adults, and 
Defendant's 
awareness 
and presence, 
as 
particularly 
desi nated 
in 
designations 
Juan Alessi. 
Available declarant; improper use of prior 
sworn testimony prohibited by Fed. R. Civ. P. 
32 and 804. 
Bank 
statements 
Statements 
indicating 
Defendant 
authorized 
signatory on 
Epstein's 
bank accounts 
Colonia 
Bank, 125 
Worth Ave., 
Palm 
Beach, FL
33480 
Declarant not unavailable 
Deposition 
of Alfredo 
Statements 
regarding 
Alfredo 
Rodriguez is 
See Motion to Exclude Depositions In Toto and 
Motion in Limine re: Diane Flores 
4 
EFTA00617182

Rodriguez 
and 
handwriting 
on 
exhibits. 
Ms. Maxwell's 
involvement in 
massages 
given to girls 
and young 
adults, as 
particularly 
desi nated 
in 
designations 
deceased. 
New York 
Presbyterian 
Hospital 
Records for 
Statement 
indicating 
that 
was 
treated at NY 
Presbyterian 
Hospital 
for female 
medical 
related issues 
when she 
was under the 
age of 
IS. 
Declarant not unavailable; second declarant, the 
person providing the information put into form, 
is not identified 
CONCLUSION 
For the foregoing reasons, Ms. Maxwell requests that any attempt by Plaintiff to utilize 
the residual hearsay clause be prohibited. 
5 
EFTA00617183

Dated: February 24, 2017 
Respectfully submitted, 
/s/ Laura A. Menninger 
Laura A. Menninger (LM-1374) 
Jeffrey S. Pagliuca (pro hac vice) 
Ty Gee (pro hac vice) 
HADDON, MORGAN AND FOREMAN, P.C. 
150 East 10th Avenue 
Denver, CO 0203 
Phone: 
Fax: 
Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell 
6 
EFTA00617184

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
I certify that on February 24, 2017, I electronically served this Response to Plaintiff's Notice Of 
Intent To Offer Statements Under, If Necessary, The Residual Hearsay Rule via ECF on the 
following: 
Sigrid S. McCawley 
Meredith Schultz 
BOLES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 
401 East Las Olas Boulevard, Ste. 1200 
Ft. Lauderdale 
Lauderdale FL 33301 
E
I
Bradley J. Edwards 
FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, 
FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. 
425 North Andrews Ave., Ste. 2 
Ft. Lauderdale. FL 33301 
Paul G. Cassell 
383 S. University Street 
Salt Lake City. UT 84112 
J. Stanley Pottinger 
49 Twin Lakes Rd. 
South Salem m
i 
NY 105 0 
Is/ Nicole Simmons 
Nicole Simmons 
7 
EFTA00617185