Epstein Secrets

l, 643 F.3d 807, 874 (11th Cir. 2011), quoting United States v. Harvey, 869 F.2d 1439, 1443 (11th Cir.1989) (en bane). See, e.g., 6 EFTA00589571 Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 262 (197 O("when a plea rests in any significant degree on a promise ... of the prosecutor, so that it can be said to be

mpede or impair its ability to protect that interest; and (4) the party's interest is represented inadequately by the existing parties to the suit." Chiles v. Thornburgh, 865 F.2d 1197, 1213 (11th Cir. 1989). In granting Mr. Epstein's motion to intervene to protect the validity of his nonprosecution agreement, Judge

ited States v. Hill, 643 F.3d 807, 874 (11th Cir. 2011), quoting United States v. Harvey, 869 F.2d 1439, 1443 (11th Cir.1989) (en banc). See, e.g., Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 262 (1971) ("when a plea rests in any significant degree on a promise ... of the prosecutor, so that it can be said to be

mpede or impair its ability to protect that interest; and (4) the party's interest is represented inadequately by the existing parties to the suit." Chiles v. Thornburgh, 865 F.2d 1197, 1213 (11th Cir. 1989). The circumstances here easily satisfy all four elements of the standard. A. Timeliness. In assessing the

43 F.3d 807, 874 (I I th Cir. 2011), quoting United States v. Harvey, 869 F.2d 1439, 1443 (I I th Cir.1989) (en 6 EFTA00583800 bane). See, e.g., Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 262 (1971)("when a plea rests in any significant degree on a promise ... of the prosecutor, so that it can be said to be

mpede or impair its ability to protect that interest; and (4) the party's interest is represented inadequately by the existing parties to the suit." Chiles v. Thornburgh, 865 F.2d 1197, 1213 (11th Cir. 1989). The circumstances here easily satisfy all four elements of the standard. A. Timeliness. In assessing the