Epstein Secrets

in light of his clear statements that he represented Jane Doe 2, I could not directly contact or "confer" with Jane Doe 2 without running afoul of the Florida Bar rules. 8. I continued to converse with Mr. Eisenberg about having Jane Doe 2 appear for a voluntary interview, which continuously delayed the inve

et seq. I had several oral and written communications with Mr. Eisenberg asking him if Jane Doe 2 would appear under the protection of a standard Kastigar letter, but he told me that Jane Doe 2 would 2 EFTA00235272 only appear if 6001 immunity was received. For example, in my letter of January 24,

in light of his clear statements that he represented Jane Doe 2, I could not directly contact or "confer" with Jane Doe 2 without running afoul of the Florida Bar rules (e.g., R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-4.2) and 28 U.S.0 § 530B. 9. I continued to converse with Mr. Eisenberg about having Jane Doc 2 appear for a

ee Ex. A. I had several oral and written communications with Mr. Eisenberg asking him if Jane Doe 2 would appear under the protection of a standard Kastigar letter, but he told me that Jane Doe 2 would only appear if statutory immunity pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 6001 was received. For example, in my letter

l chain titled Things to do in West Palm 11/4/2008 Villafafia Senior Email thanking Villafatia for her 11/3/08 email advising she spoke with the Florida Bar 11/4/2008 Correspondence from Florida Bar Ethics Counsel regarding Florida Ethics Rules involved in distributing victim notification letters 11/1

in employees — Janusz Banasiak Both initially asked for immunity. After speaking with Banasiak's attorney, r. anasi was satisfied with a standard Kastigar letter, but Ms. Mucinska's attorney was insistent on formal immunity, and as noted above, so was Individual #28. I don't believe that, prior to thi