Epstein Secrets

patently illogical — and all the more so in light of Epstein's admission in his lawsuit against M. and others that he that he was "one of M's many `Johns.— See Complaint Epstein v. Rothstein, Edwards & M s, No. 50 2009 CA0 40800 (Cir. Ct., 15th Jud. Cir., Palm Beach Co.. Dec. 7, 2009) at 146(a), pert

mmon scheme or plan admissible)," F.R.E. 415. and passages from the depositions of Epstein, No. 2, No. 4, No. 5 and 8 This brief may be found on PACER. S.D. Fla. Civil Docket for ME v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case # 9:08-cv- 80893-KAM ("Docket"), DE 140. - 6 - EFTA00728019 herself; at 35-36 (Epstein's

'Psalms" that she obtained from a religious store (DT 152:1-14). Under the circumstances, her claim for damages against EPSTEIN, one of ■.'s many "Johns" during that same period, would be so incredible and certainly not likely to produce the extraordinary settlements promised to "RRA'S investors."

Doe's brief in opposition to Jeffrey Epstein's motion for summary judgment dismissing the federal claims in this action ("Si °pp.') may be found on PACER, S.D. Ma. Civil Docket for Jane Doe v. Jeffro Epstein, Case # 9:08-cv-80893-KAM ("Dockerp, ppeP4 EFTA00207294 expressions of confidence in the s

patently illogical — and all the more so in light of Epstein's admission in his lawsuit against M. and others that he that he was "one of M's many 'Johns.'" See Complaint Epstein v. Rothstein, Edwards & M s, No. 50 2009 CA0 40800 (Cir. Ct., 15th Jut Cir., Palm Beach Co., Dec. 7, 2009) at 146(a), pert

ssible)." F.R.E. 415. and passages from the depositions of Epstein, Jane Doe No. 2, Jane Doe No. 4, Jane Doe No. 5 and 8 This brief may be found on PACER. S.D. Fla. Civil Docket for Jane. Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein. Case # 9:08-cv- 80893-KAM ("Docket"), DE 140. - 6 - EFTA00207342 herself; at 35-36 (Eps