11
Shared Docs
9
Same-Page
11 / 13
Mentions
ong been suspicion that Jeffrey Epstein was receiving favorable treatment in the criminal investigation because of his wealth and power. See, e.g., Abby Goodnough, Questions of Preferential Treatment Are Raised in Florida Sex Case, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 3, 2006, at 19 (noting questions that the public had been lef
d by the government arc subject to a protective order prohibiting their disclosure. In the related case 9:08-CV-80893 (the case where Jane Doe I and Jane Doe 2 sued Mr. Epstein for money), the Magistrate Judge prohibited Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 EFTA00177187 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 56 Entered on
. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs, 1. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. NOTICE OF' OBJECTION Petitioners Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 have moved for disclosure of settlement letters between the U.S. Attorney's Office and the lawyers who represented Jeffrey Epstein du
AM Document 56 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/07/2011 Page 2 of 19 Non-Prosecution Agreement reached between the U.S. Attorney's Office and Mr. Epstein. Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doc 2 also seek other unspecified relief, which they call "appropriate remedies," for the government's purported failure to keep them invol
ong been suspicion that Jeffrey Epstein was receiving favorable treatment in the criminal investigation because of his wealth and power. See, e.g., Abby Goodnough, Questions of Preferential Treatment Are Raised in Florida Sex Case, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 3, 2006, at 19 (noting questions that the public had been lef
Department, as the Magistrate Judge thought that Jane Doe was proceeding by way of an "internal Justice Department Complaint procedure." Of course, Jane Doe is not proceeding here by way of the internal Justice Department procedure, but rather the statutorily authorized procedure for filing a motion in t
ong been suspicion that Jeffrey Epstein was receiving favorable treatment in the criminal investigation because of his wealth and power. See, e.g., Abby Goodnough, Questions of Preferential Treatment Are Raised in Florida Sex Case, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 3, 2006, at 19 (noting questions that the public had been lef
Department, as the Magistrate Judge thought that Jane Doe was proceeding by way of an "internal Justice Department Complaint procedure." Of course, Jane Doe is not proceeding here by way of the internal Justice Department procedure, but rather the statutorily authorized procedure for filing a motion in t
long been suspicion that Jeffrey Epstein was receiving favorable treatment in the criminal investigation because of his wealth and power. See, e.g., Abby Goodnough, Questions of Preferential Treatment Are Raised in Florida Sex Case, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 3, 2006, at 19 (noting questions that the public had been le
rgument, on April 18, 2014, the Eleventh Circuit ruled in favor of the victims. at firmed this Court's decision, and simultaneously lifted its stay. Jane Doe 4 EFTA00209239 No. 1i United States, ---F.3d---, 2014 WL 1509015, No. 13-12923 at 23. The Circuit explained that "[a]lthough plea negotiations are
exually abused dozens of young girls to obtain a sweetheart plea deal with the federal government in which he served little prison time. See, e.g., Abby Goodnough, Questions of Preferential Treatment Are 17 EFTA00209524 Raised in Florida Sex Case, N.Y. Times, Sept. 3, 2006, at 19 (noting questions that the
cable statute of limitations for prosecuting him for his federal sex abuse crimes appears to be ten years. 18 U.S.C. § 3283. Epstein sexually abused Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (and dozens of other similarly situated young girls) from 2002 to 2005. As a result, if Epstein can succeed in stalling this case
ong been suspicion that Jeffrey Epstein was receiving favorable treatment in the criminal investigation because of his wealth and power. See, e.g., Abby Goodnough, Questions of Preferential Treatment Are Raised in Florida Sex Case, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 3, 2006, at 19 (noting questions that the public had been lef
Department, as the Magistrate Judge thought that Jane Doe was proceeding by way of an "internal Justice Department Complaint procedure." Of course, Jane Doe is not proceeding here by way of the internal Justice Department procedure, but rather the statutorily authorized procedure for filing a motion in t
ong been suspicion that Jeffrey Epstein was receiving favorable treatment in the criminal investigation because of his wealth and power. See, e.g., Abby Goodnough, Questions of Preferential Treatment Are Raised in Florida Sex Case, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 3, 2006, at 19 (noting questions that the public had been lef
Department, as the Magistrate Judge thought that Jane Doe was proceeding by way of an "internal Justice Department Complaint procedure." Of course, Jane Doe is not proceeding here by way of the internal Justice Department procedure, but rather the statutorily authorized procedure for filing a motion in t
long been suspicion that Jeffrey_KEstein was receiving favorable treatment in the criminal investigation because of his wealth and power. See, e.g., Abby Goodnough, Questions of Preferential Treatment Are Raised in Florida Sex Case, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 3, 2006, at 19 (noting questions that the public had been lef
/2011 Page 1 of 2 • aitadedataa% • AND ASSOCIATES October 9, 2008 United States Attorney's Office 99 N.E. 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132 Re: Jane Doe # and Jane Doe #2 v. United States of America Case No.: 08-80736-CIV- Dear I am writing to call to your attention two potentially false statements t
long been suspicion that Jeffrey_KEstein was receiving favorable treatment in the criminal investigation because of his wealth and power. See, e.g., Abby Goodnough, Questions of Preferential Treatment Are Raised in Florida Sex Case, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 3, 2006, at 19 (noting questions that the public had been lef
• aitadedataa% • AND ASSOCIATES October 9, 2008 Dexter Lee, AUSA United States Attorney's Office 99 N.E. 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132 Re: Jane Doe # and Jane Doe #2 United States of America Case No.: 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Dear Mr. Lee: I am writing to call to your attention two potential
Crime Victims' Rights During Criminal Investigations? Applying the Crime Victims' Rights Act Before Criminal Charges Are Filed
tein: International Moneyman of Mystery, N.Y. MAG., http://goo.gl/11Cayc (last visited Nov. 26, 2013). * See Jane Doe Motion, supra note 40, at 3-4; Abby Goodnough, Questions of Preferential Treatment Are Raised in Florida Sex Case, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 3, 2006, at A19. 43 The U.S. Attorney responsible for the ple
Page: HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014047 →cult for victims to discover after the fact that potential criminal charges against a criminal who has abused them have been secretly bargained away. Jane Doe Number One and Jane Doe Number Two, for example, were outraged when they discovered prosecutors had entered into an agreement blocking any prosecutio
Page: HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014050 →Entities connected to both Abby Goodnough and Jane Doe

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
Bradley Edwards
PERSON
Kenneth Marra
PERSON
Paul Cassell
PERSONJack Goldberger
PERSON
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON
United States
LOCATION
Alan Dershowitz
PERSONMaria Farmer
PERSONthe Southern District
LOCATIONRobert D. Critton
PERSON
George W. Bush
PERSONLeon Black
PERSON
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON
Salt Lake City
LOCATION
Alexander Acosta
PERSONScott Rothstein
PERSON
A. Marie Villafana
PERSON
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION
Prince Andrew
PERSON