8 ˜ u $^{T}$( x ) = ˜ N − $^{1}$cosh $^{(}$˜ ζ ) ˜ u $^{ϕ}$( x ) = ˜ N − 1 ˜ N $^{ϕ}$cosh $^{(}$˜ ζ $^{)}$+ sinh $^{(}$˜ ζ ) √ g$_{φφ}$ (43) where ˜ ζ is the rapidity in the ( T, R, θ, ϕ ) local inertial frame. However constraining the two free variables ˜ N − 1 and ˜ N ϕ by the normalization equation u $^{ν}$u$_{ν}$ = − 1 yields The four velocity thus emerges out of the nor- malization condition. Now Eq.(45) clearly will be singular on both horizons since they are defined as the solution to Δ = 0. In this way we find that even a freely falling observer can not extract the EPR correlation at and beyond the event hori- zon of a Kerr-Newman black hole. Thus no such observer can exist in this scenario which we at- tribute this to the strength of the frame dragging effects at the outer horizon since observers may be defined in the Schwarzschild black hole [1]. The result is a little surprising however it follows from the intrinsic nature of the Kerr-Newman black hole that no observer of this kind may be defined globally which is what would be required to make measurements on a bi-local property. Furthermore following the same method as with the observer at infinity, the local Wigner rotation also turns out not to be finite on and beyond the out horizon which is a clear consequence of the absence of observability and not the lost of the EPR correlation. Hence it is the inability of an observer, so defined, to make measurements that restrict the regions where the EPR correlation can be extracted successfully. As in [1] we examined circularly moving par- ticles in a local inertial frame. Similarly we measure the spin of one particle in the (1 , 0 , 0)- direction (component Q) or in the (0 , 1 , 0)- direction (component R) and the other parti- cle in the ( − 1 , − 1 , 0)-direction (component S) or (1 , − 1 , 0)-direction (components T) in the local inertial frames φ = Φ and φ = − Φ respectively. Considering next the freely falling observer Eq.(42), the angle of precession is observed to become infinite on and beyond the outer event horizon r$_{+}$ since the observer looses the ability to take such measurements. Thus on the equatorial plane the EPR correlation can not be extracted and so infers a region where information may be lost for such an observer making measurements locally. This is due to the gravitational field and accel- erations involved. Taking in to account the gen- eral relativistic effect on spin measurements are thus take in the directions (cos (Θ) , 0 , − sin (Θ))- direction or (0 , 1 , 0)-direction for one parti- cle and 1 √ 2 ( − cos (Θ) , − 1 , − sin (Θ))-direction or 1 √ 2 (cos (Θ) , − 1 , sin (Θ)) for the other one in the same respective local inertial frames. However as the radius where the experiment takes place reduces to the outer horizon, a small error can build up which still causes maximal entanglement to be lost. This corresponds to a requirement of infinite accuracy in making measurements as the observer approaches infinitely close to the hori- zon. This however still includes the trivial ro- tation Eq.(21) which could be causing the decrease in maximal violation of Bell’s in- equality. Rotating the components by ∓ Φ. The new spin components then become, (cos (Φ) , 0 , − sin (Φ))-direction (component Q $^{′}$) or (0 , 1 , 0)-direction (component R $^{′}$) for one par- ticle and 1 √ 2 ( − cos (Φ) , − 1 , − sin (Φ))-direction (component S $^{′}$) or 1 √ 2 (cos (Φ) , − 1 , sin (Φ))- direction (component T $^{′}$) for the other one. The violation of Bell’s inequality still reduces from maximal as, In the Kerr-Newman geometry a decrease in the maximal violation of Bell’s inequality is observed, in particular as ˜ N = a $^{(}$Q 2 − 2 MR ) − 2 a $^{2}$MR + a $^{2}$Q2 − a $^{2}$R2 − R 4 (44) ˜ N ϕ = ±$^{√}$ − 2 a $^{2}$RM + a $^{2}$Q2 − a $^{2}$R2 − R 4 R $^{√}$Δ ( R ) (45) 〈 QS 〉 + 〈 RS 〉 + 〈 RT 〉−〈 QT 〉 = 2 √ 2 cos $^{2}$(Θ) (46) 〈 Q $^{′}$S $^{′}$〉 + 〈 R $^{′}$S $^{′}$〉 + 〈 R $^{′}$T $^{′}$〉 − 〈 Q $^{′}$T $^{′}$〉 = 2 √ 2 cos $^{2}$(Δ) (47) V. MAXIMUM VIOLATION OF BELL’S INEQUALITY