Epstein Secrets

order compelling disclosure of a confidential federal non-prosecution agreement and addendum, pursuant to motions to unseal, filed by non-parties, E.W., B.B. and Palm Beach Newspapers d/b/a The Palm Beach Post ("the Post"),I The confidential federal non-prosecution agreement and addendum between th

ith notice to the United States, the other party to the Agreement. (A-6). Rather than seeking relief from Judge Marra in federal court, non- party E.W., a victim of Mr. Epstein, filed a motion in the state criminal action on May 12, 2009, seeking to intervene and unseal the non-prosecution agreemen

this case"--and not by Petitioner, Jeffrey Epstein is referred to by proper name. Non-party interveners, E.W., B.B. and The Post are referred to as E.N., B.B. and The Post. All emphasis is supplied unless indicated otherwise. The following symbol is used: A — Petitioner's appendix. 0911212019 3241

quy, they were an inducement for defendant to enter into his guilty pleas. They are proper objects of discovery. However, unless they are unsealed, E.W. is unable to obtain them or utilize them in her case. 7. Pursuant to Rule 2.420(dX5), the Court must hold a hearing on this motion in open court.

(Exhibit "C".) 6. It is against public policy for these documents to have been sealed and hidden from public scrutiny. As a member of the public, E.W. has a right to have these documents unsealed. Furthermore, these documents are relevant and material to E.W 's civil action against defendant. As s

OF FLORIDA, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. Case Nos.2006.CF9454 AXX NONPARTY &W.'S MOTION TO VACATE ORDER SEALING RECORDS AND UNSEAL RECORDS E.N., a nonparty, moves pursuant to the Rules of Judicial Administration Rule 2.420(dX5) to vacate the order sealing records and unseal two documents in

S to strike. 14 THE MITNESS: Ho. Is BY MR. SCAROLA: IS Q If Jeffrey Epstein alleges in this 19 complaint against Bradley Edwards that III., E.W. or 24 Jane Doe voluntarily consented to their sexual 21 molestation, could Jeffrey Epstein have possibly made 22 that claim on the basis of any

appens -- and things that they do 2 Q So before you took on the representation of 2 afterwards -- that they are touched -- is information 3 ., E.N. and Jane Dee, your only experience with ) you would evaluate in evaluating their case, wouldn't 4 alleged sexual abuse were three -- 4 you? 5

ATE OF FLORIDA, E.W., THE PALM BEACH POST, B.B, Respondents. E.W.'S SEALED REQUEST TO DISMISS THE PETITION FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION Respondent, E.W., would show the Court as follows: 1. This Court lacks jurisdiction to hear this petition. The order under review is a non-final order for which no

ger, gOOd morning. And Hr. Berger, your client is E -- HR. BERGER: E.W., yes. THE COURT: Anybody else here? MR. EDWARDS: Brad Edward■ on behalf of E.N. as well, Judge. Thanks. EFTA00233748 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June