Epstein Secrets

ilege, even in the context of the well-established and absolute attorney- client privilege. In Garner v. Wolfinbarger, 430 F.2d 1093 (5th Cir. 1970), the Court of Appeals with jurisdiction over this Court held that an attorney-client privilege can give way when "the client asserting the privilege is an entity which i

mation reflecting telephone calls (including telephone logs and telephone billing statements) made by or received by Reinhart from Jeffrey Epstein, the Florida Science Foundation, Jack Goldberger, Alan Dersowitz, Roy Black, Ken Starr, Lillian Sanchez, and any other person involved with the criminal defense of Jeffrey Epstein

ard looked into all of this, made their recommendation, found him to have 130 points and I see no reason to disturb that." A.96:11-13 (Tr.). While the Court of Appeals has recognized that a Board-generated case summary may constitute "reliable hearsay" upon which the Court may base a SORA risk calculation, the law

release program, see Letter of Deputy MI, Ex. D, which permitted him to leave the jail in the morning six days a week for his place of employment, the Florida Science Foundation, and return in the evening. That Mr. Epstein satisfactorily complied with the requirements of the program is evidenced by the fact that he remained

ard looked into all of this, made their recommendation, found him to have 130 points and I see no reason to disturb that." A.96:11-13 (Tr.). While the Court of Appeals has recognized that a Board-generated case summary may constitute "reliable hearsay" upon which the Court may base a SORA risk calculation, the law

se program, see Letter of Deputy K. Smith, Ex. D, which permitted him to leave the jail in the morning six days a week for his place of employment, the Florida Science Foundation, and return in the evening. That Mr. Epstein satisfactorily complied with the requirements of the program is evidenced by the fact that he remained