Epstein Secrets

ver his strenuous objection, to produce documents given to him by the government during the course of his settlement/plea negotiations with it. See Jane Doe #2 v. Epstein, No. 08-80119-MARRA, Doc. 462. In response to that order, settlement negotiation correspondence authored by government prosecutors (

s Role in Promoting Effective Plea/Settlement Discussions . . . . 14 C. Rule 410, the Work-Product Privilege, and the Sixth Amendment 17 D. The District Court's Reasons for Finding that The Correspondence at Issue Did Not Fall Within Rule 410 Are Unpersuasive 24 ii EFTA00209661 Case: 13-12923 Date F

.' Questions about Epstein's deal started to surface after a series of lawsuits were filed by two of his alleged victims. The women, identified as Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, claim in court papers that they were unaware of the secret deal being made between the defense team and prosecutors back in 2007 tha

ssible criminal prosecution throughout the SEC's investigation, as made plain by his invocation of his Fifth Amendment rights during SEC testimony. The District Court's Order On June 18, 2019, following a hearing and the government's submission of an affidavit, Judge Furman ordered the government to provide additio

.' Questions about Epstein's deal started to surface after a series of lawsuits were filed by two of his alleged victims. The women, identified as Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, claim in court papers that they were unaware of the secret deal being made between the defense team and prosecutors back in 2007 tha

ion, as made plain by his invocation of his Fifth Amendment rights during SEC testimony. 39 EFTA00076695 SDNY News Clips, Tuesday, July 9, 2019 The District Court's Order On June 18, 2019, following a hearing and the government's submission of an affidavit, Judge Furman ordered the government to provide additio