Epstein Secrets

515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877

port a conviction or provide a link in the chain of evidence to support a conviction against Epstein. See M•, Sheldon v. Sheldon, 193 B.R. 152, 162 (S.D. N.Y. 1996)(the Court, in camera, determined that answers to certain deposition questions would support a conviction or provide a link in the chain of ev

BY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing was served on July 28, 2008 by U.S. mail on all counsel named on the service list. Jeffrey M. Herman, Esq. Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boul,~vard, Suite 2218 Miami, Florida 33160 Michael R. Tein SERVICE LIST

on FLSD Docket 08/12/2008 Page 8 of 13 pending before this Court, are literally lifted4 from the plaintiffs' brief submitted to, and rejected by, the Northern District of New York in Francis.) The court specifically held that "because the victims were minors at the time of the Defendants' actions alleged in both [the civil and

chard Horace Willits [email protected] Robert C. Josefsberg [email protected] Adam D. Horowitz [email protected] Stuart S. Mermelstein [email protected] William J. Berger [email protected] Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 213 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2009

KAM Document 213 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2009 Page 5 of 8 CASE NO: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON 6 District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Court can take judicial notice of their authenticity. See Fed. R. Evid. 201. Counsel for Jane Doe could not have provided this affidavit in

tiff; and (iii) such other and further relief this Court deems just and proper. Dated: April 27, 2009 Respectfully submitted, By: s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) [email protected] Adam D. Horowitz (FL Bar No. 376980) [email protected] MERME

Court affirmed the District 1 In a case relied upon by Defendant, Kelly v. Kelly, 911 F.Supp. 66 (N.D.N.Y. 1996), the issue was consolidation for purposes of joint trial, so that case is inapposite here. - 1 - Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 85 E

y submitted, By: s/ Adam D. Horowitz Stuart S. Mermelstein (FL Bar No. 947245) [email protected]

system. Doe v. Del Rio, 241 F.R.D. 154, 157 (S.D. N.Y. 2006) The public has a strong interest in prot