Epstein Secrets

Document 526 Entered on FLSD ti cket 04/12/2010 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. Related Cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-8089

ions. The procedure is mandatory and governs state and federal proceedings and has been upheld in the United States Supreme Court. See U.S. ex rel, Touhy v. Ragen 340 U.S. 462 (1951). In addition, the Privacy Act (Title 5, U.S.C., Section 552a(b), prohibits the release of agency records pertaining to

y gave a straightforward account of relevant background information based on [the expert's] own knowledge and experience" (quoting United States v. Johnson, 860 F.3d 1133, 1141 (8th Cir. 2017)); United States v. Halamek, 5 F.4th 1081, 1087-89 (9th Cir. 2021) (holding that expert testimony on grooming wa

ert testimony. The Government has moved to preclude the defense from offering such evidence, including by calling the case agents identified in its Touhy notice. (See Gov't Motions in Limine Section III). Accordingly, if the defense plans to call case agents for such testimony—which the Court should p

.struck Epstein's duty to pay.Josefsbetg if he and.the victims· did not accept settlements -- capped.at $150,000 -- and 'instead pursued lawsuits. Johnson said it appears .the government was frying to. balance the lesser ·sentence for Epstein with recovering $150;000 for ~ach victi_m. 'Tve.11ever:, ev

t as to what happened to him is through the media rather than through the United States Attorney's office. We've made requests informal. We have made Touhy requests. We've been told there is a pending investigation. But we trust your Honor and the judiciary, and with SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.O. (21