Epstein Secrets

xhibit B-91). On September 15, 2008, I sent Notification Letters to Individuals 18 and 32 (Exhibit B-92). Soon thereafter, I received I letter from Jeffrey Herman, one of the civil attorneys who represented I number of victims, notifying me that he had complained to the Florida Bar that the Victim Notificatio

nusz Banasiak and Mucinska. Both initially asked for immunity. After speaking with Banasiak's attorney, Mr. Banasiak was satisfied with I standard Kastigar letter, but Ms. Mucinska's attorney was insistent on formal immunity, and as noted above, so was Individual #28. I don't believe that, prior to thi

m assuming Counsel is not 22 asking you to divulge attorney/client -- 23 MR. TEIN: Of course not. 24 BY MR. TEIN: 25 Q. a are you aware that Jeffrey Herman, Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 34 of 314 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001244 EFT

ee Ex. A. I had several oral and written communications with Mr. Eisenberg asking him if Jane Doe 2 would appear under the protection of a standard Kastigar letter, but he told me that Jane Doe 2 would only appear if statutory immunity pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 6001 was received. For example, in my letter

n Email regarding proposed response to Goldberger B 65 7/10/2008 Victim Notification letters to Individuals #3 (via Richard H. Willits), #8 (via Jeffrey Herman), ##17 (via Theodore J. Leopold), #25 (via Jeffrey Herman), #26 (via Jeffrey Herman), #37 (via Michael E. Dutko), and #44 (via Jeffrey Herman) B-6

in employees — Janusz Banasiak Both initially asked for immunity. After speaking with Banasiak's attorney, r. anasi was satisfied with a standard Kastigar letter, but Ms. Mucinska's attorney was insistent on formal immunity, and as noted above, so was Individual #28. I don't believe that, prior to thi