Epstein Secrets

dmits that it has information about a personal or business relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and another prosecutor involved in the Epstein case, Matthew Menchel. Answers I0 EFTA00081125 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 11 of 64 to Requests for Admission at I 2

chel has a personal or business relationship with defendant Jeffrey Epstein. Gov't Answers to RFA's ¶ 20. This could potentially show misconduct by Menchel, and also potentially a motive to violate the victims' rights as explained previously. The Government's privilege log has numerous entries showing

ccess to information against any public interest in non-disclosure. That balancing process is ordinarily made with reference to factors discussed in Frankenhauser v. Rizzo, 59 F.R.D. 339, 344 (E.D.Pa.1973), specifically: (1) the extent to which disclosure will thwart governmental processes by discouraging ci

No Attorney-Client Relationship; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Epstein, with e- mail from Menchel (July 5, 2007, 3:30 p.m.), Villafana to Menchel (July 4, 2007, 5:16 p.m.), and Sloman to Villafana (July 3, 2007, 1:47 p.m.), attached Suppl. Bo

eged information. Tuite v. Henry, 98 F.3d 1411, 1418 (D.C. Cir. 1996). The balancing is ordinarily made by considering the ten factors identified in Frankenhauser v. Rizzo, 59 F.R.D. 339, 344 (E.D. Pa. 1973). Those ten factors decisively tip in favor of the victims receiving access to the information. D. Wor

nchel has a personal or business relationship with defendant Jeffrey Epstein. Gov't Answers to RFA's 120. This could potentially show misconduct by Menchel, and also potentially a motive to violate the victims' rights as explained previously. The Government's privilege log has numerous entries showing

ccess to information against any public interest in non-disclosure. That balancing process is ordinarily made with reference to factors discussed in Frankenhauser v. Rizzo, 59 F.R.D. 339, 344 (E.D.Pa.1973), specifically: (1) the extent to which disclosure will thwart governmental processes by discouraging ci