Court Filing: 2333

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1078-5 Filed 07/29/20 Page 1 of 161

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1078-5 Filed 07/29/20 Page 1 of 161 EXHIBIT E EFTA00084366 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1078-5 Filed 07/29/20 Page 2 of 161 New Jeffrey Epstein accuser says he molested her at 13, told her to wear children's underwear January 18.2020 I 12-04am I Updated Jeffrey Epstein A woman claiming she was Jeffrey Epstein's "first-known victim" says she was sexually abused by the now-dead pedophile — who called himself her "Godfather" — when she was 13 years old. Jane Doe met Epstein and his friend, Ghislaine Maxwell. in the summer of 1994 at Michigan's Interlochen Arts Camp, where she was In voice training, according to newly filed court papers suing Epstein's estate and Maxwell. The duo quickly took her under their wing, taking her to movies and on shopping trips in her home state of Florida and all the while grooming her for abuse, the Manhattan federal court suit says. Epstein "started to slowly display his pedophilic ways when shopping with Doe

Court Filing: 233

Sigrid McCawley, attorney for Minor Victim-2, requests permission from Judge Alison J. Nathan to bring electronic devices to the courthouse for scheduled hearings and trial in the United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell case. The request is made in accordance with Standing Order M10-468. The letter is filed via ECF on April 22, 2021.

Ces2e.29-12,407413r3cliAlienDtidutinEl t310282 if663615/233/2174ig Plage aoat 9

Ces2e.29-12,407413r3cliAlienDtidutinEl t310282 if663615/233/2174ig Plage aoat 9 HADDON MORGAN FOREMAN July 29, 2020 Honorable Loretta A. Preska United States District Court Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P C Ty Gee 150 East 10th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80203 PH 303.831.7364 HI 303.832.2628 www.hmllaw.com tgee@hmflaw.com Re: Reconsideration of the Court's July 23 Ruling Giuffie v. Ghislaine Maxwell, No. 15 Civ. 7433 (LAP) Dear Judge Preska: As counsel for Ms. Maxwell we write to request that the Court vindicate its Protective Order and punish its violation. Ms. Maxwell's two deposition transcripts were designated "Confidential" and subject to the protection of the Protective Order. Both transcripts ended up in the hands of the government, which used them to bring an indictment against Ms. Maxwell, charging her with, among other things, perjury in her deposition testimony. This is a serious violation

Letter Motion

Letter Motion, USA v. Maxwell, No. 1:20-cr-00330-1 (S.D.N.Y. Jul 21, 2020)

EFTA00024708

EFTA00038962