Epstein Secrets

in TIG Insurance Corporation of America - 2 - EFTA00613623 Epstein v. Rothstein and Edwards Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMB/Division AG (TIG) v. Johnson, 799 So.2d 339 (Fla. 4'h DCA 2001). Consequently, Epstein would like to set a motion directed toward the sufficiency of the Privilege Log. 6. Epst

ce." The law is settled that the privilege not to reveal the name of a confidential informant is "uniquely available to the government." See, e.g., Holman v. Cayce, 873 F.2d 944, 946 (6ih Cir. 1989) (and cases cited). Other than the cases which speak to the First Amendment privilege of reporters to pro

ll say, that's when you'll need privacy the most." OTHER FBI NEWS Senators Make US Attorney Recommendations For State Of Washington. The AP (1/26, Johnson) reports Sens. Patty Murray (D-WA) and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) have recommended Nick Brown and Vanessa Waldref "for Washington state's two US attorney

to contain 11 Molotov cocktails and multiple firearms. FBI Seeks Capitol Siege Tips Through Billboard Ads. The Springfield (MO) News-Leader (1/26, Holman, 44K) reports that in its efforts to encourage tips on the January 6 storming of the Capitol, the FBI placed ads on thousands of billboards across

ument 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Flietit0A ()MO D.C. ELECT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 08-80804-Civ-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: JANE DOE, a/k/a JANE DOE #1, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, HALEY ROBSON, and SARAH KELLEN, Defendants. NOTICE OF REMOVAL July 1

9 (1883) (stating that "`[n]o court will lend its aid to a [plaintiff] who founds [a] cause of action upon an immoral or an illegal act'") (quoting Holman v. Johnson, 98 Eng. Rep. 1120 (K.B. 1775)); see also id. (explaining that this policy is ("not for the sake of the defendant, but because [the court

Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Frebaiyi ciO4400 D.C. ELECT PrONIC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 08-80804-Civ-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: JANE DOE, a/k/a JANE DOE #1, Plaintiff, Vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. NOTICE OF REMOVAL July 18, 2008 STEVEN M. LARIMORE

149 (1883) (stating that 'Inlo court will lend its aid to a [plaintiff] who founds [a] cause of action upon an immoral or an illegal act') (quoting Holman v. Johnson, 98 Eng. Rep. 1120 (K.B. 1775)); see also id. (explaining that this policy is "not for the sake of the defendant, but because [the courts

Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 FIP6040y1 0O1$00 D.C. ELECT tic UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 08-80804-Civ-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: JANE DOE, a/k/a JANE DOE N1, Plaintiff, Vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. NOTICE OF REMOVAL July 18, 2008 STEVEN M. LARIMORE

49 (1883) (stating that "`[n]o court will lend its aid to a [plaintiff] who founds [a] cause of action upon an immoral or an illegal ace") (quoting Holman v. Johnson, 98 Eng. Rep. 1120 (K.B. 1775)); see also id. (explaining that this policy is "'not for the sake of the defendant, but because [the court

AM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 peangl (O1)60 D.C. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 08-80804-Civ-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: JANE DOE, aik/a JANE DOE #1, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. July 18, 2008 STEVEN N. LARUAORE CLERK O.S. MST. CT.

49 (1883) (stating that "'[n]o court will lend its aid to a [plaintiff' who founds [a] cause of action upon an immoral or an illegal ace") (quoting Holman v. Johnson, 98 Eng. Rep. 1120 (K.B. 1775)); see also id. (explaining that this policy is "not for the sake of the defendant, but because [the courts

Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 08-80804-Civ-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: JANE DOE, a/k/a JANE DOE #1, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. :me °D4° July 18, 2008 STEVEN M. LARIM0111 CLERK U4.

49 (1883) (stating that "Injo court will lend its aid to a [plaintiff] who founds [a) cause of action upon an immoral or an illegal act'") (quoting Holman v. Johnson, 98 Eng. Rep. 1120 (K.B. 1775)); see also id. (explaining that this policy is "not for the sake of the defendant, but because [the courts