Epstein Secrets

legal counsel filed a motion to "quash" service of process, alleging that process was not properly made. Attached to the Motion was an Affidavit of Richard Barnett, which swore that an "unmarked and unpostmarked envelope was discovered in the mailbox at Mr. Epstein's vacation home in New York at 9 East 7111 St

nothing short of an intentional fraud being committed on the court. The circumstances surrounding the making of this statement strongly suggest that Barnett swore to this false statement deliberately, for the purpose of obstructing proper proceedings in this case. Defendant Epstein's history of obstruct

not state who made the discovery. The affidavit does not state whether Bamett has personal knowledge of the facts contained in his affidavit. 13. Barnett subsequently filed a second affidavit, this time to merely announce that nobody named "Mark` was at the house on October 8, 2010. While this may be

is a document which purports to be a return of service."). In his motion to quash, Epstein concedes the materials were left at his °vacation home.° Barnett Aff. at 1. Epstein's New York Mansion is well known for being the largest private residence in Manhattan and for being owned by Epstein. Given Marsigli

pies were sent through the mail. 'The Court again declines to allow discovery on whether Richard Barnett resides at Defendant's New York home. Mr. Barnett submitted an affidavit sworn under penalty of perjury that he does not reside at that address. (See Barnett Aff.) Plaintiff has not submitted any e

efendant in accordance with New York law, including that copies were sent through the mail. 'The Court again declines to allow discovery on whether Richard Barnett resides at Defendant's New York home. Mr. Barnett submitted an affidavit sworn under penalty of perjury that he does not reside at that address. (S

sides at Defendant's New York home. Mr. Barnett submitted an affidavit sworn under penalty of perjury that he does not reside at that address. (See Barnett Aff.) Plaintiff has not submitted any evidence to suggest that Mr. Barnett is not credible, so allowing discovery on this point would simply be a waste

n under penalty of perjury that he does not reside at that address. (See Barnett Aff.) Plaintiff has not submitted any evidence to suggest that Mr. Barnett is not credible, so allowing discovery on this point would simply be a waste of resources. 2 EFTA00724751 Case 9:08-cv-80381-KAM Document 32 Ent

Defendant in accordance with New York law, including that copies were sent through the mail. 'The Court again declines to allow discovery on whether Richard Bamett resides at Defendant's New York home. Mr. Bamett submitted an affidavit sworn under penalty of perjury that he does not reside at that address. (Se

esides at Defendant's New York home. Mr. Bamett submitted an affidavit sworn under penalty of perjury that he does not reside at that address. (See Barnett Aff.) Plaintiff has not submitted any evidence to suggest that Mr. Barnett is not credible, so allowing discovery on this point would simply be a waste