Epstein Secrets

alto Shapiro United States, 335 U.S. 1, 19, 68 S.Ct. 6, 1385, 92 L.Ed. 1787 (1948) (following rule of construction of Mike). More recently, in Kastigar, the Court up- held the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. 6002 on the ground that use immunity "is coextensive with the scope of the privi- lege again

certain charges pending in Alabama. Be cause it disputed the very existence of a grant of immunity, the government object- ed to the holding of a Kastigar hearing as unwarranted. Faced with this disputed claim of an un- written grant of immunity, the magistrate did not hold a traditional Kastigar hea

fendant on appeal following a conviction is a matter of * pro- cedure and does not bearylin live rights."); United States 598 F.Supp. 453, 468 (S.D.N. 9 mo- tion to revoke bail) ("[Defendant's] entitle- ment to bail, and the criteria by which that entitlement will be measured, constitute 'modes

ch evidence should not be introduced because it was obtained as a result of the debriefing. This provision is necessary to avoid the necessity for a Kastigar hearing. Furthermore, under this agreement, no information disclosed by your client during the debriefing will be offered in evidence against your

to occur September , 2006. Please be advised that if your client complies with every provision of this agreement, then the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("this Office") will treat all statements made by your client during said debriefing as statements made pursuant to Rule 11(e) of the Fe

ch evidence should not be introduced because it was obtained as a result of the debriefing. This provision is necessary to avoid the necessity for a Kastigar hearing. Furthermore, under this agreement, no information disclosed by your client during the debriefing will be offered in evidence against your

), to occur September 2006. Please be advised that if your client comp ies wt every provision of this agreement, then the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("this Office") will treat all statements made by your client during said debriefing as statements made pursuant to Rule 11(e) of the Fe

bpoenaed solely as a witness. During our last conversation, you stated that Mr. Banasiak would be willing to speak with investigators pursuant to a Kastigar letter. Please let me know if that is the case and, if so, when you and Mr. Banasiak are available. My office would rightly question why I would as

to address your concern about criminal exposure, if your client complies with every provision of this agreement, then the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("this Office") will treat all statements made by your client during said debriefing as statements made pursuant to Rule 11(f) of the Fe

bpoenaed solely as a witness. During our last conversation, you stated that Mr. Banasiak would be willing to speak with investigators pursuant to a Kastigar letter. Please let me know if that is the case and, if so, when you and Mr. Banasiak are available. My office would rightly question why I would as

to address your concern about criminal exposure, i f your client complies with every provision of this agreement, then the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("this Office") will treat all statements made by your client during said debriefing as statements made pursuant to Rule 11(f) of the Fe