Epstein Secrets

ners during the investigation of Epstein are highly relevant in determining whether each petitioner can even invoke the CVRA. Through her attorney, James Eisenberg, Esq.,' Jane Doe No. 2 refused to be interviewed by the FBI and U.S. Attorney's Office unless she was granted immunity. Ex. A, Sept. 21, 2006 Ltr.

.,' Jane Doe No. 2 refused to be interviewed by the FBI and U.S. Attorney's Office unless she was granted immunity. Ex. A, Sept. 21, 2006 Ltr. from Eisenberg to AUSA ; Ex. S, ¶¶ 6-12. Thus, she was unwilling to provide any information regarding her encounters with Epstein unless she was assured her state

t proceedings. Indeed, the only trial court other than a federal district court that has been included within the scope of the CVRA's provisions is the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. See 18 U.S.C. § 3771(e)(3). Moreover, under petitioners' argument, state court rulings would be subjected to review by federal courts. See, e.g.,

.,' Jane Doe No. 2 refused to be interviewed by the FBI and U.S. Attorney's Office unless she was granted immunity. Ex. A, Sept. 21, 2006 Ltr. from Eisenberg to AUSA Villafafia; Ex. S, 6-12. Thus, she was unwilling to provide any information regarding her encounters with Epstein unless she was assured he

ners during the investigation of Epstein are highly relevant in determining whether each petitioner can even invoke the CVRA. Through her attorney, James Eisenberg, Esq.,' Jane Doe No. 2 refused to be interviewed by the FBI and U.S. Attorney's Office unless she was granted immunity. Ex. A, Sept. 21, 2006 Ltr.

t proceedings. Indeed, the only trial court other than a federal district court that has been included within the scope of the CVRA's provisions is the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. See 18 U.S.C. § 3771(e)(3). Moreover, under petitioners' argument, state court rulings would be subjected to review by federal courts. See. e.g.,

q.,' Jane Doe No. 2 refused to be interviewed by the FBI and U.S. Attorney's Office unless she was granted immunity. Ex. A, Sept. 21, 2006 Is. from Eisenberg to AUSA Villafafia; Ex. S, ¶16-12. Thus, she was unwilling to provide any information regarding her encounters with Epstein unless she was assured h

ners during the investigation of Epstein are highly relevant in determining whether each petitioner can even invoke the CVRA. Through her attorney, James Eisenberg, Esq.,' Jane Doe No. 2 refused to be interviewed by the FBI and U.S. Attorney's Office unless she was granted immunity. Ex. A, Sept. 21, 2006 Is. f

t proceedings. Indeed, the only trial court other than a federal district court that has been included within the scope of the CVRA's provisions is the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. See 18 U.S.C. § 3771(e)(3). Moreover, under petitioners' argument, state court rulings would be subjected to review by federal courts. See. e.g.,