Epstein Secrets

65:3 convince 148:17 convinced 135:23 cooperate 124:16 cooperating 36:17 39:14 coordinating 36:3 copied 27:16 copy 99:10 118:15 corner 18:4 Cornwell 5:16,20 correct 5:25 12:23 30:18 39:6 64:5 71:23 89:4 97:3.4 107:7 119:3 121:4 121:20 122:21,22 123:6 124:25 125:20 134:22 135:10,11,15,16 1

if it happened it's relevant to 5 proving that it had happened to your client. 4 The whole point is to prove that it / happened to your client, Donau.* it happened to • other people. And the circumstances, if they can be • similar, that helps as wall. 10 II • You spoke about modus operandi.

1992) 252 United States v. Coppa, 267 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 2001) 274 United States v. Corbett, 750 F.3d 245 (2d Cir. 2014) 137 United States v. Cornielle, 171 F.3d 748 (2d Cir. 1999) 60, 77, 78, 85 United States v. Corr, 543 F.2d 1042 (2d Cir. 1976) 181 xii EFTA00077618 United States v. Counte

Thus, the defendant's claim that she no longer has access to certain evidence is not a proper basis to dismiss the Indictment. See United States v. Donau, 356 F. Supp. 1091, 1094 (S.D.N.Y. 1973) ("A bare allegation that records have been lost or destroyed, which might relate Ig The Government notes t

1992) 252 United States v. Coppa, 267 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 2001) 274 United States v. Corbett, 750 F.3d 245 (2d Cir. 2014) 137 United States v. Cornielle, 171 F.3d 748 (2d Cir. 1999) 60, 77, 78, 85 United States v. Corr, 543 F.2d 1042 (2d Cir. 1976) 181 xii EFTA00039433 United States v. Counte

Thus, the defendant's claim that she no longer has access to certain evidence is not a proper basis to dismiss the Indictment. See United States v. Donau, 356 F. Supp. 1091, 1094 (S.D.N.Y. 1973) ("A bare allegation that records have been lost or destroyed, which might relate Ig The Government notes t