Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-35557House OversightOther

Court filing references defamation case involving Ms. Maxwell and mentions Mr. Epstein and Mr. Cassell

The excerpt provides only generic legal arguments about Rule 801(d)(2)(E) and briefly names individuals without any specific allegations, dates, transactions, or actionable details. It lacks concrete Ms. Maxwell is accused of a defamatory statement from 2015. The filing notes that Ms. Maxwell's statement does not mention Mr. Epstein. Mr. Cassell is referenced in relation to a 'fantastical conspir

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #011447
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The excerpt provides only generic legal arguments about Rule 801(d)(2)(E) and briefly names individuals without any specific allegations, dates, transactions, or actionable details. It lacks concrete Ms. Maxwell is accused of a defamatory statement from 2015. The filing notes that Ms. Maxwell's statement does not mention Mr. Epstein. Mr. Cassell is referenced in relation to a 'fantastical conspir

Tags

federal-rules-of-evidencecoconspirator-hearsaydefamationlegal-filinglegal-exposurehouse-oversight

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
10 id. 12 13 14 L5 16 ne) 18 life) 20 21 22 23 24 25 144 H3vlgiu2 box via the video depositions that we've taken. MR. PAGLIUCA: I thought I was back to my old days as a public defender when I started the practice of law, your Honor. Now I'm arguing an 801(d) (2) (E) motion instead of a defamation case. I think we have to start with the notion that is true, that this is a defamation case in which Ms. Maxwell is alleged to have made a defamatory statement in 2015. In that defamatory statement Ms. Maxwell does not mention any of these individuals and doesn't mention Mr. Epstein, and so the starting point for this is, this is an entirely different issue than Mr. Cassell and his fantastical conspiracy argument here. If we want to stick to the legal issues in this case, I think we first need to understand that there is actually a specific rule of evidence that relates to co-conspirator hearsay exception, and that is Rule 801(d) (2) (E) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, and significantly, under that rule -- and this is why the cases using Rule 801(d) (2) (E) find indicia of trustworthiness in co-conspirator hearsay statements they are made at or during the course or in furtherance of a conspiracy. And absent that finding, statements of co-conspirators are deemed to be hearsay. So what we're talking about here are not statements purportedly made by any of these individuals in 2000 or 2001. We're talking about statements that they are seeking to (A) SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Phone(212) 805-0300

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.