Epstein Secrets

against being required to produce and/or testify. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir

witness against himself." (DE 242, p.5); see also Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (I Ith Cir. 1985) (c

nd Jury Subpoena, 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2nd Cir. 1993); Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir.

nd provides, in relevant part, that "[n]o person...shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself" (DE 242, p.5); see also Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 ( 1 1 th Cir. 1985) (citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded liberal constructi

ege against being required to produce or testify. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d 1258, 1263 (9 Cir.

incriminate him in future criminal proceedings.” Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985)(citi

f minors to sexual activity,” ring hollow. See 1 Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d at 1263 (the “privil

might incriminate him Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 480 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2010 Page 2 of 10 - 3 in future criminal proceedings.” Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985)(citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded “liberal construction i

against being required to produce and/or testify. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir

itness against himself." (DE 242, p.5); see also Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985) (ci

nd Jury Subpoena, 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2nd Cir. 1993); Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir.

provides, in relevant part, that "[n]o person ... shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." (DE 242, p.5); see also Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985) (citing Lefkowitz v. Turley. 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded liberal construction

ege against being required to produce or testify. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d 1258, 1263 (9"' Cir

put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings? Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985)(citing 2 EFTA00592192 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 462 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/04/2010 Page 3 o

of minors to sexual activity,"' ring hollow. See Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d at 1263 (the "privil

criminate him 2 EFTA00728617 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 480 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2010 Page 3 of 10 in future criminal proceedings." Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985)(citing Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded "liberal construction

nd Jury Subpoena, 1 F.3d 87, 93 (2nd Cir. 1993); Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir.

provides, in relevant part, that "[tic) person...shall be compelled in any Criminal Case to be a witness against himself." (DE 242, p.5); see also Edwin v. Price, 778 F.2d 668, 669 (11th Cir. 1985) (citing Lefkowitz v. Turley 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973)). The privilege is accorded liberal construction in