Epstein Secrets

Therefore, an in camera hearing should occur to determine what objections and privileges must be raised before further disclosure is made. U.S. v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554, 575 (1989)(disclosing materials 2 Because of the relief sought in this Rule 4 Appeal, Epstein's civil lawyers have not obtained a cop

expressly Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 560 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/10/2010 Page 4 of 11 agree not to disclose it"), ajf'd 389 F.2d 11 (2d Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 835 (1968). The simple fact is that this court must determine, in camera, what is in the "book" or "journal", whether

fact that target letters and subpoenas were issued relating to certain financial offenses. Sse Lg., DEs 282 and 283 submitted in camera and U.S. v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554 (1989Xdisclosing materials to the district court does not have the legal effect of terminating a privilege thereby allowing parties t

rns have been considered `confidential,' pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §6103." Id. Because of the principle of confidentiality, it further noted, "courts in the Second Circuit have found personal financial information to be presumptively confidential or cloaked with a qualified immunity," and must, therefore, "balance the

t fact that target letters and subpoenas were issued relating to certain financial offenses. See M·, DEs 282 and 283 submitted in camera and U.S. v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554 ( 1989)( disclosing materials to the district court does not have the legal effect of terminating a privilege thereby allowing partie

rns have been considered 'confidential,' pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §6103." Id. Because of the principle of confidentiality, it further noted, "courts in the Second Circuit have found personal financial information to be presumptively confidential or cloaked with a qualified immunity," and must, therefore, "balance the