Epstein Secrets

6-1CAM (S. D. Fla. 2009) Engle v. Liggett Group, Inc., 9 15 fn. 2 945 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 2006) 15 E.W. v. Epstein, Case No. 502008CA028XXXMBAB (Florida Circuit Court) 4 Gonzales v. Nat? Broad Co., Inc., 194 F.3d 29 (2d Cir. 1999) 7 In re Horowitz, 482 F.2d 72 (2s Cir. 1973) 12 In re Steinhardt Partners, L

motion to quash, claiming that the recording was somehow protected by a journalist's privilege. Jane Doe responded, and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (McKenna, J.) held a hearing and listened to the tape in camera. The district court then ruled that the tape was not protected by the j

ee Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-CV-80069-KAM, DE 9. Two weeks later (March 6, 2008), having changed lawyers, Jane Doe #1 refiled her complaint in Florida Circuit Court as the instant case, adding two nominal defendants Mr. Epstein's personal secretary, and MB one of Jane Doe #1's contemporaries. These defendants

ess is .... Ga.," and stating that - S.D.G. is also the unnamed party in a lawsuit filed by her father on her behalf in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 08-80069, which was filed without the consent of the mother"), In re Sandberg v. Gonzalez, Case No. 50 2008 DR 001141 (Palm Be

ee Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-CV-80069-KAM, DE 9. Two weeks later (March 6, 2008), having changed lawyers, Jane Doe #1 refiled her complaint in Florida Circuit Court as the instant case, adding two nominal defendants: a, Mr. Epstein's personal secretary, and MIS, one of Jane Doe #1's contemporaries. These defe

Robert Senior, Esq. Black. Srebnick, Kornspan & Stumpf. P.A. EFTA00180301 March 20, 2011 To whom it may concern: I served as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida from 2005 through 2009. Over the past weeks, I have read much regarding Mr. Jeffrey Epstein. Some appears true, some appears distorted.

ee Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-CV-80069-KAM, DE 9. Two weeks later (March 6, 2008), having changed lawyers, Jane Doe #1 refiled her complaint in Florida Circuit Court as the instant case, adding two nominal defendants: Mr= Mr. Epstein's personal secretary, and MI one of Jane Doe #1's contemporaries. These defend

ress is .... Ga.," and stating that "S.D.G. is also t e unnamed party in a lawsuit filed by her father on her behalf in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 08-80069, which was filed without the consent of the mother"), In re Sandberg v. Gonzalez Case No. 50 2008 DR 001141 (Palm Bea

ee Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-CV-80069-KAM, DE 9. Two weeks later (March 6, 2008), having changed lawyers, Jane Doe #1 refiled her complaint in Florida Circuit Court as the instant case, adding two nominal defendants: Mr. Epstein's personal secretary, and , one of Jane Doe #1's contemporaries. These defendants

ress is .... Ga.," and stating that "S.D.G. is also the unnamed party in a lawsuit filed by her father on her behalf in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 08-80069, which was filed without the consent of the mother"), In re (Palm Beach Co. Family Ct.) . If this turns out to be th

e Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-CV-80069-KAM, DE 9. Two weeks later (March 6, 2008), having changed lawyers, Jane Doe #1 refilled her complaint in Florida Circuit Court as the instant case, adding two nominal defendants: Mr. Epstein's personal secretary, and one of Jane Doe #1's contemporaries. These defendants ha

ess is .... Ga.," and stating that "S.D.G. is also the unnamed party in a lawsuit filed by her father on her behalf in the 11.5. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 08-80069, which was filed without the consent of the mother"), In re v. Case No. 50 2008 DR 001141 (Palm Beach Co. Family Ct