Epstein Secrets

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 Patri

able from those here. “[I]n Hubbell, the incriminatory nature of the production of the documents sought was obvious.” Bear Stearns & Co., Inc. v. Wyler, 182 F.Supp. 2d 679, 683 (N.D.Ill. 2002). Specifically, production of the documents at issue in Hubbell, concerning the Whitewater investigation, w

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] s/ Stuart S. Mermelstein - 11 - Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 81 Ent

f the party asserting the privilege to “explain how the act of producing documents would pose a real danger of incrimination.” Bear Sterns & Co. v. Wyler, 182 F.Supp. 2d 679, 681 (N.D. Ill. 2002). Defendant’s reliance on United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (2000), is inadequate. In Hubbell, it

a video of Epstein being asked whether he had an "egg-shaped" penis became a youtube.com sensation. It first appeared on The Palm Beach PostWeb site. Critton blamed attorney Spencer Kuvin for releasing it. Kuvin said it was .public record. The civil suits began mounting after Epstein agreed to plead guilty

05.27 requires a court order before the records are unsealed ,s THE COURT: Exactly. Exactly. All right. Let me hear from Mr. Aronberg's attorney, Mr. Wyler. MR. 'WYLER: Thank you, your Honor. May it please the Court -- THE COURT: Good morning', Sir. MR. WYLER: Good morning. Your Honor, I just wanted to l