Epstein Secrets

tection for their investigations while the victims were minors, but completely eliminate those protections the moment one of the victims turned 18. The District Court for the Northern District of Florida confirmed this position and specifically rejected the plaintiffs' contrary argument. See Doe v. Francis. No. 5:

milar to those in the instant actions (State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 2006 CF 09454, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit. Palm Beach County) (the "Florida Criminal Action")) Shortly thereafter, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (the "USAO") began a federal grand-jury investigati

tection for their investigations while the victims were minors, but completely eliminate those protections the moment one of the victims turned 18. The District Court for the Northern District of Florida confirmed this position and specifically rejected the plaintiffs' contrary argument. See Doe v. Francis. No. 5:

milar to those in the instant actions (State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 2006 CF 09454, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit. Palm Beach County) (the "Florida Criminal Action")) Shortly thereafter, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (the "USAO") began a federal grand-jury investigati

tection for their investigations while the victims were minors, but completely eliminate those protections the moment one of the victims turned 18. The District Court for the Northern District of Florida confirmed this position and specifically rejected the plaintiffs' contrary argument. See Doe v. Francis. No. 5:

milar to those in the instant actions (State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 2006 CF 09454, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit. Palm Beach County) (the "Florida Criminal Action")) Shortly thereafter, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (the "USAO") began a federal grand-jury investigati

tection for their investigations while the victims were minors, but completely eliminate those protections the moment one of the victims turned 18. The District Court for the Northern District of Florida confirmed this position and specifically rejected the plaintiffs' contrary argument. See Doe v. Francis. No. 5:

nal case described in that motion (State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 2006 CF 09454 AXX, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County) (the "Florida Criminal Action"). As explained below, the parallel federal criminal action against him described in that motion (In re Grand Jury, No. FGJ 07-103(WPB), United St

tection for their investigations while the victims were minors, but completely eliminate those protections the moment one of the victims turned 18. The District Court for the Northern District of Florida confirmed this position and specifically rejected the plaintiffs' contrary argument. See Doe v. Francis. No. 5:

milar to those in the instant actions (State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 2006 CF 09454, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit. Palm Beach County) (the "Florida Criminal Action")) Shortly thereafter, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (the "USAO") began a federal grand-jury investigati