Epstein Secrets

cution agreement and the release of material protected by Rule 6(e), both of which are remedies which the plaintiffs have said they are seeking. See Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's Response to Government's Sealed Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Doc. 127 at 14. If plaintiffs still

n in a recent pleading, see Doc 381, the identity of each of the Jane Does has been known to Mr. Epstein for many years in part as a result of each Jane Doe's decision to delay the litigation of their CVRA claims in order to prioritize their parallel monetary damage lawsuits against Mr. Epstein during whi

385 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/22/2016 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs I. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant / INTERVENOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF HIS ATTENDANCE AT

al criminal charges. See Memorandum from Craig S. Morford, Acting Deputy Att'y Gen., U.S. Dep't of Justice, to Heads of Department Components, U.S. Att'ys re: Selection and Use of Monitors in Deferred Prosecution Agreements and Non—Prosecution Agreements with Corporations 9 EFTA00211551 Case 9:08-c

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE I AND JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant INTERVENOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF HIS ATTENDANCE AT OR PARTICIPATION IN

of criminal charges. See Memorandum from Craig S. Morford, Acting Deputy Att'y Gen., U.S. Dep't of Justice, to Heads of Department Components, U.S. Att'ys re: Selection and Use of Monitors in Deferred Prosecution Agreements and Non-Prosecution Agreements with Corporations (Mar. 7, 2008) at note 2, ava

07 with the execution of the NPA but instead deferred any disclosure until after Mr. Epstein's plea of guilty in state court. 3 EFTA00621911 3. Jane Doe 2 was hostile to the efforts of the USAO and FBI to cooperate against Mr. Epstein, see Villafana Declaration, Dkt. 14 at pg. 4, 6, see Dkt. 361, Exhib

tead it was the norm. See Memorandum from Craig S. Morford, Acting Deputy Att'y Gen., U.S. Dept of Justice, to Heads of Department Components, U.S. Att'ys re: Selection and Use of Monitors in Deferred Prosecution Agreements and Non— Prosecution Agreements with Corporations (Mar. 7. 2008) at note 2 avail