Epstein Secrets

ds. THE COURT: Okay,. Thank you,- Ma'am.- Ms. Boyagian, back to you. MS. BOYAGIAN: Your Honor, I'd like to note that in the Butterworth case in which the Supreme Court limited the application 905.27 by saying that a, witness can reveal her Own testimony and prohibiting that they violate the First Amendment -- THE CO

a, witness can reveal her Own testimony and prohibiting that they violate the First Amendment -- THE COURT: Say that again, please. MS. BOYAGIAN; In the Supreme Court Case, the Butterworth case', in which the Supreme Court ruled that 905.27 can't restrict a Grand Jury witness from revealing her own testimony, that would

e. Thank you. THE COURT: Thanks very much. MR. EDWARDS: I believe my next client who is going to speak is probably going to speak as Jane Doe. JANE DOE NO. 1: Yes, Jane Doe. THE COURT: We'll say Jane Doe No. 1, just for the record. JANE DOE NO. 1: Okay. Thank you for allowing us to speak today.

ms. The victims made two principal arguments for dismissal: first, that this Court lacks jurisdiction over such an interlocutory appeal in light of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Mohawk Industries, Inc.'. Carpenter, 130 S. Ct. 599 (2009) (attorney-client privilege ruling not immediately appealable; any inj

Nos. 13-12923, 13-12926, 13-12928 IN THE riiteb'tateg Court of appeabs FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JANE DOE NO. 1 AND JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiffs-Appellees UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee ROY BLACK ET AL., Intervenors-Appellants REPLY IN SUPP

iminal prosecutors seeking to force him to plead guilty to criminal charge. Moreover, the cases Epstein relies upon are older cases, decided before the Supreme Court's recent decision in Mohawk. The Mohawk decision makes clear that even as to highly sensitive attorney-client materials, "[a]ppellate courts can reme

Nos. 13-12923, 13-12926, 13-12928 IN THE Einiteb ibtateo Court of appeato FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JANE DOE NO. 1 AND JANE DOE NO. 2, 1. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ROY BLACK ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellees Defendant-Appellee Intervenors-Appellants OPPOSITIO

ee - over the most important consideration, the strong public and private interests at stake. The Goodyear Tire analysis is far more consonant with the Supreme Court's teaching in Jaffee than is MTSG. In Baker v. Secretary, U.S. Dept of Transportation, 452 Fed. Appx. 934, 937 (11th Cir. 2012), this Court appeared

Case: 13-12923 Date Filed: 08/05/2013 Page: 1 of 75 No. 13-12923 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JANE DOE NO. 1 AND JANE DOES NO. 2, Plaintiffs-Appellees v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee ROY BLACK ET AL., Intervenors/Appellants ON APPEA

e deposition of the Secretary of Agriculture, whose order fixing the maximum rates to be charged at the Kansas City stockyards was being challenged. The Supreme Court observed that the proceeding before the Secretary "has a quality resembling that of a judicial proceeding," and that probing of the mental processes

on FLSD Docket 02/01/2016 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE NO. 1 AND JANE DOE NO. 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S OPPOSITION TO PETITIONERS' MOTION FOR DEPOSITIONS OF GOVERNMENT WITNESS