#houseoversight011339
LightNews LightNews
epsteinweb.bsky.social
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011339.jpg
#epsteinweb #houseoversight011339
36 H3VOGIU1 1 without getting into the details of another separate lawsuit 2 that did not involve Ms. Giuffre as a party, and so we've moved 3 in limine. 4 And let me make clear that I emphasize the narrowness 5 of our motion here. We seek to preclude evidence involving 6 that litigation. Your Honor has already heard from my 7 colleague, Ms. McCawley, who has presented our argument for why 8 Dershowitz should not be in this case at all, and of course, if 9 we prevail on point 1, this point becomes irrelevant. 10 But in addition to point 1, we don't need to be ide getting into the details of the separate lawsuit. It's not 12 relevant to the case of Giuffre versus Maxwell. Defendants, in 13 their responsive brief, if I understand correctly what they say 14 is, oh, well look. Why didn't Ms. Giuffre join the lawsuit or 5 why hasn't she filed a lawsuit against Dershowitz? What's 16 going on there? Ley Well, of course, your Honor is aware, there are a 18 variety of statutes of limitation around the country, and 19 indeed around the world. Ms. Giuffre has not -- those statutes 20 have not all run at this point. There are varying Pal considerations that go into whether or not someone like 22 Ms. Giuffre would file a lawsuit, and these issues shouldn't be 23 discussed in front of the jury. That's nothing to do with this 24 particular lawsuit. 29 Moreover, defendant apparently argues that statements SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011339
February 7, 2026 at 12:58 AM