Epstein Secrets

its reaching the same conclusion. Jones , 471 F.3d at 538-39 (citing United States v. Griffith , 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States v. Taylor , 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Scisum , 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Hamilton , 456 F.2d 171, 173

at she did not want to return. Because no calls went directly from Epstein or his employees to Jane Doe #9, the exact dates of contact are unknown. JD#9 says that she believes the events occurred around her birthday and there is phone traffic between JD#9 and her recruiter in February, March, and Apr

circuits reaching the same conclusion. Jones, 471 F.3d at 538-39 (citing United States I. Griffith, 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States, Taylor, 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States I Scisum, 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States Hamilton, 456 F.2d 171, 173 (3d C

Doe #9 and = 4 calls with Ma, and 3 calls with M. JD#9 reported that Illalapproached her one summer when she was working at the Wellington Mall. JD#9 said that she thought she was 16 or 17 years' old at the time. Her telephone contact with be an in July 2004, so this probably was the summer of 20

rcuits reaching the same conclusion. Jones, 471 F.3d at 538-39 (citing United States v. Griffith, 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States v. Taylor, 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Scisum, 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Hamilton, 456 F.2d 171, 173 (

at she did not want to return. Because no calls went directly from Epstein or his employees to Jane Doe #9, the exact dates of contact are unknown. JD#9 says that she believes the events occurred around her birthday and there is phone traffic between JD#9 and her recruiter in February, March, and Ap

its reaching the same conclusion. Jones , 471 F.3d at 538-39 (citing United States v. Griffith , 284 F.3d 338, 351 (2d Cir. 2002); United States v. Taylor , 239 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2001); United States v. Scisum , 32 F.3d 1479, 1485-86 (10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Hamilton , 456 F.2d 171, 173

most. She estimates that she saw him hundreds of times. There area proximately 220 calls between Jane Doe #9 and , 4 calls with , and 3 calls with JD#9 reported that approached her one summer when she was working at the Wellington Mall. JD#9 said that she thought she was 16 or 17 years' old at the