Epstein Secrets

ally provide a 'lead or clue' to evidence having a tendency to incriminate. 8. In Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-CIV-80119 MARRA/JOHNSON, the Court sustained Epstein's Fifth Amendment objections to several interrogatories asking Epstein to identify information potentially related to t

ppear to infringe upon or otherwise implicate Epstein's rights under the Fifth Amendment, based on the particularized showing made by Epstein in his Response Memorandum, the 8 EFTA00723243 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 242 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2009 Page 9 of 22 facts alleged in the Complaints, and the

NJOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 7, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON , Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, CASE NO.: 08- 80893-CIV-MARRNJOHNSON Plaintiff,

ppear to infringe upon or otherwise implicate Epstein's rights under the Fifth Amendment, based on the particularized showing made by Epstein in his Response Memorandum, the 8 EFTA00728601 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 242 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2009 Page 9 of 22 facts alleged in the Complaints, and t

STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE, Plaintiff, Vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al. Defendant. CASE NO. 08-CV-80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Related Cases: 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 PLAINTIFF

riate to raise it now for the first time. . . . Even were the Court to consider the argument on its merits, for the reasons explained in Jane Doe's Response Memorandum (D.E. #485), pp. 4-9, the Court finds said argument without merit." Omnibus Order, case no. 9:08-cv-80119-KAM, doc. #513, at 2-3. As noted above, a