Epstein Secrets

ASSMCATION STATE AM' CLASS i" CENTRAL RCDS NTA LOCI • •. • • F.P. CLEAR: MED.CLEINI IN: Ix, JUL: .1 NOB EFTA00231493 A48 Order granting Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion for Travel, dated December 18, 2009 tf IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA - CRIM

by the ~ant. EFTA00231492 A47 Palm Beach Sheriffs Office Booking Card for Jeffrey Epstein, dated June 30, 2008 04/26/2010 14:51 3553626 NAME: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY ALMS NAMES: OVER 8 NANCE EPSTE7. JEFFREY - EPSTEIN. JEFFREY EDWARD- MORday. Aim 30. 2008 I I:33:10 AM iNCARcEFLATiON DATE/TIME 06/30/20

JUL: .1 NOB EFTA00231493 A48 Order granting Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion for Travel, dated December 18,

he would masturbate into a towel while receiving a massage. In other cases he would of the victim with his hands or . One 14 year old.described how Epste and thereafter, when contacted by law enforcement, she had to identify the offender through the use of a to arra . Another 16- ear-old victim desc

rmination Hearing, dated August 26, 2010 Supreme gnarl of tht Stott of 41eb twit August _26. 2_0111' LOO CENTRE STREET NEW YORK. N.Y. WOO Mr. Jelimy Epstein 9 East 71' Street New York. N.Y. 10021 Re: SCID # 30129-2010 Dear Mr. Epstein: Please be advised that pursuant to the 1996 Sex Offender Registra

JUL: .1 NOB EFTA00231493 A48 Order granting Jeffrey E. Epstein's Motion for Travel, dated December 18, 2

the level of registration that was applicable to Mr. Epstein's case Under Florida's registration scheme there

, 35 Fresh Del Monte Produce N.V. v. Eastbrook Caribe, 40 A.D.3d 415 (1st Dep't 2007) 43 Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) 48 Matthews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) 32 New York State Bd. of Sex Exam'rs v. Ransom, 249 A.D.2d 891 (4th Dep't 1998) 18 People v: Arotin, 19 A.D.3d 845 (3d De

A51 Letter from Jack A. Goldberger to NYS Sex Offender Registry Regarding Florida Registration Level applicable to Jeffrey E. Epstein, dated August 12, 2010 A51-A52 ACTERBURY GOLDBERGER ' JOSEPH R ATTERBURY ' 1 JACK A. GOLDBERGER ' JASON S.WEISS ' Board Certified Crimoal Trial

e of Florida that required sex offender registration. The purpose of this letter is to clarify the level of registration that was applicable to Mr. Epstein's case Under Florida's registration scheme there are two levels of registration available based on a risk assessment. Florida characterizes these t

garding Florida Registration Level applicable to Jeffrey E. Epstein, dated August 12, 2010 A51-A52 ACTERBU

garding Florida Registration Level applicable to Jeffrey E. Epstein, dated August 12, 2010 A51-A52 ACTERBUR

the level of registration that was applicable to Mr. Epstein's case Under Florida's registration scheme there

afeguards). Courts evaluating that liberty interest under the procedural due process analysis articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Matthews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) (balancing the private interest affected by state action, the risk of erroneous deprivation of that interest, and the interest

w York County Clerk's Index No. 30129/2010 e€u laurk Supreme Trani APPELLATE DIVISION-FIRST DEPARTMENT PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, —against— JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, Respondent, Defendant-Appellant. BRIEF FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT JAY P. LE•FKOWITZ SANDRA LYNN MUSUMECI KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 601 Lexington Aven

E OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, —against— JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, Respondent, Defendant-Appellant. BRIEF FOR DE

MENT PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, —against— JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, Respondent, Defendant-Appellant. BRI

MENT PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, —against— JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, Respondent, Defendant-Appellant. BRIE

, 35 Fresh Del Monte Produce N.V. v. Eastbrook Caribe, 40 A.D.3d 415 (1st Dep't 2007) 43 Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) 48 Matthews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) 32 New York State Bd. of Sex Exam'rs u. Ransom, 249 A.D.2d 891 (4th Dep't 1998) 18 People v. Arotin, 19 A.D.3d 845 (3d De

rk County Clerk's Index No. 30129/2010 '.ex 'Dark Sul:mettle Tourt APPELLATE DIVISION-FIRST DEPARTMENT PEOPLE OF THE STATE OP NEW YORK, —against— JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, Respondent, Defendant-Appellant. rI BRIEF FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT JAY P. LEFKOWITZ SANDRA LYNN MUSUMECI KnAND & ELLIS LLP 601 Lexington Aven

E OF THE STATE OP NEW YORK, —against— JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, Respondent, Defendant-Appellant. rI BRIEF FO

MENT PEOPLE OF THE STATE OP NEW YORK, —against— JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, Respondent, Defendant-Appellant. rI

MENT PEOPLE OF THE STATE OP NEW YORK, —against— JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, Respondent, Defendant-Appellant. rI

, 35 Fresh Del Monte Produce N.V. v. Eastbrook Caribe, 40 A.D.3d 415 (1st Dep't 2007) 43 Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) 48 Matthews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) 32 New York State Bd. of Sex Exam'rs v. Ransom, 249 A.D.2d 891 (4th Dep't 1998) 18 People v. Arotin, 19 A.D.3d 845 (3d De

15 (quoting former First Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sloman). Indeed, one of the experts that Interve

r determining remedy, neither party disputes that Mr. Epstein has a right to be heard . . . . Mr. Epstein resp

opportunity to be heard `at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.'" Reams v. hvin, 561 F.3d 1258, 1263 (11th Cir. 2009) (quoting Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 333 (1976)). Here Epstein argues that he has been "deprived . . of the ability to contest numerous allegations and stipulations at t

RECEIVED PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS THROUGH AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD AND SUBMIT EVIDENCE ON ISSUES PERTAINING TO REMEDIES. 6 A. As an Intervenor, Epstein Has Received Procedural Due Process 6 B. The Court's Findings About Epstein Counsel's Awareness of Concealment of the Non- Prosecution Agreement a

15 (quoting former First Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sloman). Indeed, one of the experts that Interve

r determining remedy, neither party disputes that Mr. Epstein has a right to be heard . . . . Mr. Epstein resp