Epstein Secrets

in of a crime. (DE 242, p. 18) United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980). 2 Case 9:

Entered on FLSD Docket 11/02/2009 Page 23 of 24 MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 [email protected] BU

witness, (the trial court) can conclude that the witness could 'legitimately refuse to answer essentially all relevant questions." United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. Fla. 1980)); United States v. Tsui, 646 F.2d 365, 367-68 (9th Cir. 1981). This exception is narrow and is applicable w

t Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein By: ---r~f-=-----.%,,:--¥-1-----t+-'t--- R OB R D. C ITTON, Florida Bar No. 224162 [email protected] MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 [email protected] BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-84

y threatening questions" which could furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to convict Epstein of a crime. (DE 242, p.18) United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980). b. The District Court Judge Court Should Reverse or Modify The Magistrate Judge's Order (DE 242) Relative to I

on this~ day of , 2009. By:.IZ'::1-:::--:i'-'~:::::::C':":"".:-:::::--::-:: RO E . CRITTON, JR., ESQ. Florida Bar No. 224162 [email protected] MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 [email protected] BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/8

nected to a crime. A Fifth Amendment privilege can only be properly asserted with respect to “genuinely threatening questions.” United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980). Epstein’s concern appears to be not that he will be prosecuted for having money in a bank, but rather that thi

aw.com Isidro Manual Garcia [email protected] Jack Patrick Hill [email protected] Katherine Warthen Ezell [email protected] Michael James Pike [email protected] Paul G. Cassell [email protected] Richard Horace Willits [email protected] Robert C. Josefsberg rjosefsberg@po

tein of a crime. (DE 242, p.18) United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980). 5. As detai

., ESQ. Flor· a arNo. 224162 rcrit@ clclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 [email protected] BU

vilege raised as to these interrogatories valid, and asserted by Epstein only with reference to "genuinely threatening questions." United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980). The danger Epstein faces by being forced to testify in this instance is "substantial and real, and not merely t

e No. 502008CA037319XXXXMB AB Page 14 of 14 BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP (561) 515-31 ax By: R D. Critton, Jr. orida Bar #224162 Michael J. Pike Florida Bar #617296 (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) EFTA00723232 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEA

witness, (the trial court) can conclude that the witness could 'legitimately refuse to answer essentially all relevant questions." United States v. Goodwin 625 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir. Fla. 1980)); United States v. Tsui, 646 F.2d 365, 367-68 (9th Cir. 1981). This exception is narrow and is applicable wh

691 jaaescabellsouth.net Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Respe By: ROB R D. C ITTON , ESQ. Florida Bar No. 22416 rcrit(bciclaw.com MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 mpikeebcIclaw.com BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-84