Epstein Secrets

. 2008) (same). On February 20, amid these filings, Jane Doe #1 was deposed in State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, 502006CF009454AXXXMB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct., filed Jul. 19, 2006), a parallel state-court criminal action. During that deposition, she made numerous admissions that completely undermined the

133 17 01316 EFTA00234240 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 0721:2008 Page 18 of 100 DCA 1998) (approving reasoning in Feld & Sons, holding that "no public policy should allow [a plaintiff] to recover damages as a result of engaging in criminal conduct" where the plaintiff had

this Court. See Jane Doe #1 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-cv-80069-KAM (S.D. FM. filed Doe v. Epstein et at, Case No. 50 2008 CA 006596 XXXX MB (FM. 15th Cir. Ct. filed Mar. 6, 2008). Lewis 'reins. 30$96amailonsuL Sum 340,CoColtui Gaon, Foram 33133 1 01311 EFTA00180357 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 1

against public policy"). Based on the foregoing, the plaintiff cannot blame someone else (= ) for the consequences of her own criminal conduct. Cf. Feld & Sons, Inc. v. Pechner, Dorfman, Wolfe, Rounick and Cabot, 458 A.2d 545, 552 (Pa. Super. Ct, 1983) (holding that law-firm clients could not recover damag

. 2008) (same). On February 20, amid these filings, Jane Doe #1 was deposed in State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, 502006CF009454AXXXMB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct., filed Jul. 19, 2006), a parallel state-court criminal action. During that deposition, she made numerous admissions that completely undermined the

are against public policy"). Based on the foregoing, the plaintiff cannot blame someone else for the consequences of her own criminal conduct. Cf. Feld & Sons, Inc. v. Pechner, Dorfman, Wolffe, Rounick and Cabot, 458 A.2d 545, 552 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1983) (holding that law-firm clients could not recover dama

. 2008) (same). On February 20, amid these filings, Jane Doe 41 was deposed in State of Florida v. Jeffrey Epstein, 502006CF009454AXXXMB (Fla. 15th Cir. Ct., filed Jul. 19, 2006), a parallel state-court criminal action. During that deposition, she made numerous admissions that completely undermined the

against public policy"). Based on the foregoing, the plaintiff cannot blame someone else ( ) for the consequences of her own criminal conduct. Cf. Feld & Sons, Inc. v. Pechner, Dorfman, Wolffe, Rounick and Cabot, 458 A.2d 545, 552 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1983) (holding that law-firm clients could not recover dama