Epstein Secrets

ated against me by Edwards, including Edwards noticing the depositions of famous dignitaries and celebrities such as Bill Clinton, Donald Trump and David Copperfield, who appeared to have no connection whatsoever to any claims of misconduct made by Edwards's clients. Equally consistent with the allegations in t

ies such as Bill Clinton, Donald Trump and David Copperfield, who appeared to have no connection whatsoever t

A]n identification or a report from a single credible victim or eyewitness can provide the basis for probable cause ...." City of St. Petersburg v. Austrino, 898 So.2d 955, 960 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (emphasis added)! The same principles of probable cause apply in a malicious prosecution case, see, e.g., F

travel was alleged by Edwards's clients, and noticing the depositions of famous dignitaries and celebrities, such as Bill Clinton, Donald Trump and David Copperfield, who were not alleged to have had any connection whatsoever to any specific claims of misconduct against the plaintiffs in the Epstein Cases. See le

es, such as Bill Clinton, Donald Trump and David Copperfield, who were not alleged to have had any connection

[A]n identification or a report from a single credible victim or eyewitness can provide the basis for probable cause ...." City of St. Petersburg v. Austrino, 898 So.2d 955, 960 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (emphasis added).1° 10 Paragraph 20 of Epstein's original complaint demonstrates his reliance upon such a r

on Epstein's private plane, and Edwards, himself, did in fact notice the depositions of famous dignitaries and celebrities such as Bill Clinton and David Copperfield, even though the claims of Edwards' clients in the Epstein Cases allegedly involved exclusively local conduct in Epstein's home in Palm Beach County

s and celebrities such as Bill Clinton and David Copperfield, even though the claims of Edwards' clients in th

[A]n identification or a report from a single credible victim or eyewitness can provide the basis for probable cause ...." City of St. Petersburg v. Austrino, 898 So.2d 955, 960 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (emphasis added).13 See, also, e.g., EMI Sun Village, Inc. v. Catledge, No. 13-cv-21594, 2013 WL 5435780 (S.