Epstein Secrets

ithout violating the Fifth Amendment”). See also Garner v. United States, 96 S.Ct. 1178, 424 U.S. 648 (1

Alan Goldberger, Esq. [email protected] Robert D. Critton, Esq. [email protected] Bradley James Ed

the statutory provision."') ( quoting Harris v. Garner, 216 F.3d 970, 972 (11th Cir. 2000) (en bane)) (f

ra-Johnson Page 29 Respectfully submitted, By: Isl Robert D. Critton, Jr. ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar N

rimination claim because the government may use voluntarily filed tax returns against a defendant without violating the Fifth Amendment”). See also Garner v. United States, 96 S.Ct. 1178, 424 U.S. 648 (1976) (holding that disclosures in tax returns are not compelled incriminations and may be used as e

LIST DOE vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. [email protected] Robert D. Critton, Esq. [email protected] Bradley James Edwards [email protected] Isidro Manuel Garcia [email protected] Jack Patrick

ithout violating the Fifth Amendment”). See also Garner v. United States, 96 S.Ct. 1178, 424 U.S. 648 (1

Alan Goldberger, Esq. [email protected] Robert D. Critton, Esq. [email protected] Bradley James Ed

f legislative interpretation, and where they often should end it as well, which is with the words of the statutory provision.'") (quoting Harris v. Garner, 216 F.3d 970, 972 (11th Cir. 2000) (en bane)) (first alteration omitted). In this case, the plain text of the 2003 statute is both clear and unmist

a matter of law to the summary judgments sought. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court enter the summary judgments sought herein. By: re Robert D. Critton. Jr. ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 [email protected] MICHAEL J. PUCE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mnikalclaw.com I HEREBY C