Epstein Secrets

l can’t say very much about, even though all the principles are dead and the case is more than 40 years old. I was one of the lawyers involved in the Chappaquiddick case—the investigation of Senator Edward Kennedy for driving his car off a bridge on the Island (or peninsula of) Chappaquiddick, resulting in the dr

yers involved in the Chappaquiddick case—the investigation of Senator Edward Kennedy for driving his car off a bridge on the Island (or peninsula of) Chappaquiddick, resulting in the drowning death of Mary Jo Kopechne. 1969 was an eventful summer. My family and I were on Fire Island anticipating watching a man w

h Court dismissed the case as moot, thus postponing the decision as to whether it would uphold race-specific affirmative action programs. But Justice William O. Douglas, probably the 57 DeFunis v. Odegaard, 416 U.S. 312 (1974). 291 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017378 4.2.12 WC: 191694 court’s most liberal member at the time,

ll, in some of the most cataclysmic events of the last half century—from the assassination of JFK, to the forced resignation of Richard Nixon, to the Chappaquiddick investigation of Ted Kennedy, to the impeachment of President Clinton, to the war crimes trials of accused war criminals, to the defense of Israel in

never I visited—then as a full participant). The first time I went to Kronheim’s for lunch, we picked up two justices at the Supreme Court building: William O. Douglas and William Brennan. I had previously met Justice Brennan through his son Bill, who was my law school classmate and moot court partner. Justice Brenn

zzled when it came to their cases. One case in which I sided with the privacy rights of a public figure over the publication rights of the media was Chappaquiddick. I was part of the defense team organized by Senator Kennedy’s staff. Part of my job was to assure the confidentiality of the testimony given at the

rari in Rudolph v. Alabama (1963)—a case involving imposition of the death penalty on a black man who was convicted of raping a white woman. Justice William O. Douglas signed on as well. The dissenters invited the bar to address the following questions, which they deemed “relevant and worthy of argument and consider