Epstein Secrets

, 2005, Defendants EPSTEIN and traveled from Teterboro, New Jersey to Palm Beach County, Florida, aboard the Gulfstream aircraft owned by Defendant HYPERION AIR, INC. #. On or about May 6, 2005, Defendants EPSTEIN, and traveled from Teterboro, New Jersey to Palm Beach County, Florida, aboard the Gulfs

(citing United States v. Griffith , 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States v. Taylor , 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Scisum , 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Hamilton , 456 F.2d 171, 173 (3d Cir. 1982)). Instead, the court concluded that the Gove

ned via grand jury subpoenas. CONCLUSION Based on tiling recommend that the Office approve the attached indictment charging Epstein, , JEGE, and Hyperion. I also recommend that the Office refuse a pre-indictment interview to Epstein or his counsel and that no information about the status of the case

8-39 (citing United States I. Griffith, 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States, Taylor, 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States I Scisum, 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States Hamilton, 456 F.2d 171, 173 (3d Cir. 1982)). Instead, the court concluded that the Governmen

(citing United States v. Griffith , 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States v. Taylor , 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Scisum , 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Hamilton , 456 F.2d 171, 173 (3d Cir. 1982)). Instead, the court concluded that the Gove

rand jury subpoenas. CONCLUSION Based on the fore oin , I recommend that the Office approve the attached indictment charging Epstein, , JEGE, and Hyperion. I also recommend that the Office refuse a pre-indictment interview to Epstein or his counsel and that no information about the status of the case b