4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
5 / 4
Mentions
Victim's Rights Act Case. On July 7, 2008, Doe v. United States, case no. 08-cv-80736-KAM, a Crime Victims' Rights Act case, was filed on behalf of Jane Doe, who was sexually assaulted by Jeffrey Epstein when she was a minor child. Four days later, Jane Doe filed her Reply to the Government's response t
ad, the purpose of requesting those records was to obtain them for use in a separately filed Crime Victims' Rights Act ("CVRA") suit, Jane Doe I and Jane Doe 2, Case No. 08-80736-CIV, Marra/Johnson which was brought for several purposes, including invalidating the [Non-Prosecution] Agreement . . . (Emphasi
ial complaint, Epstein emphatically stated that "[t]his lawsuit is filed and will be vigorously pursued against all these defendants." See Epstein's Initial Complaint at `Summary'. (Emphasis added). In accordance with this representation to the Court, Epstein made no attempt to stay his newly-filed civil case pen
une 30, 2010, listed all named victims ofJeffrey Epstein as fact witnesses for trial, which of course included Jane Doe. As such, any argument that Jane Doe's deposition is needed "solely" as a result of a recent Court ruling is also absurd. 5. Rather, Epstein was obviously well-aware of the relevance of
rds adv. Epstein Case No.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Response in Opposition to Epstein's Motion to Reopen Discovery Page 3 of 8 throughout Epstein's Initial Complaint. Any suggestion that L.M.'s deposition is needed "solely" as a result of the Court's December 5, 2017 ruling is therefore absurd. 4. Jane Doe is a
back Funding, ac, et at v. Scott W. Rothstein, et aL, Case No. 09-062943(19); Deposition Transcript of Jeffrey Epstein. 502008CA028058XXXXMB AB; and Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, 08-80893-CIV Marra/Johnson. Rothstein returned to South Florida in November 2009 to face federal criminal charges and civil cl
ne Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, 08-80893-CIV Marra/Johnson; copies of subpoenas; Deposition Transcript of Jeffrey Epstein, p. 23; line 4-p. 38; line 22; Initial Complaint filed by Epstein dated December 9, 2009, pages 13-20; Razorback Amended Complaint; pp. 16-17; ¶1148, 49. The litigation practices giving rise to pr
ck Funding, LLC, et aL v. Scott W. Rothstein, et aL, Case No. 09-062943(19); Deposition Transcript of Jeffrey Epstein. 502008CA028058XXXXMB AB; and Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, 08-80893- CIV Marra/Johnson. Rothstein returned to South Florida in November 2009 to face federal criminal charges and civil cl
ane Doe v. Jefrey Epstein, 08-80893-C1V Marra/Johnson; copies of subpoenas; Deposition Transcript of Jeffrey Epstein, p. 23; line 4-p. 38; line 22; Initial Complaint filed by Epstein dated December 9, 2009, pages 13-20; Razorback Amended Complaint; pp. 16-17; ¶¶ 48, 49. In addition, on July 24, 2009, while he wa
Entities connected to both Jane Doe and Initial Complaint

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
Bradley Edwards
PERSON
Kenneth Marra
PERSONJack Goldberger
PERSON
Scarlett Johansson
PERSONMaria Farmer
PERSON
George W. Bush
PERSONScott Rothstein
PERSONJack Scarola
PERSON
Bill Clinton
PERSON
Weissing
PERSONJaffe
PERSONPalm Beach Lakes Boulevard
LOCATION
Lauderdale
LOCATIONAtterbury
ORGANIZATION
South Florida
LOCATION
David Copperfield
PERSONSearcy Denney Scarola
PERSONMarc S. Nurik
PERSONWright
PERSON