Epstein Secrets

Six, to-wit: The Grand Jurors of the State of Florida, inquiring in and for the body of said County of Palm Beach, upon their oaths do present that JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN in the County of Palm Beach aforesaid, in the Circuit and State aforesaid, COUNT ONE FELONY SOLICITATION OF PROSTITUTION on or about or between t

ion For Time Certain Based On Parallel Civil And Criminal Proceedings With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, (hereinafter "EPSTEIN") by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby moves this Court for the entry of an order staying or continuing this action for a time certain

13 In the instant case, the privilege applies as Defendant EPSTEIN "has reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a

of Palm Beach, upon their oaths do present that JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN in the County of Palm Beach aforesaid, i

of Palm Beach, upon their oaths do present that JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN in the County of Palm Beach aforesaid, in

attorney for JEFFREY EPSTEIN. 3. I represented Mr. EPSTEIN in the negotiation of and entering into a Non-Pr

admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Interrogatory No. 5. Identify all persons who came to the New Mexico Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatori

9-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONS

ame in an Indictment as victims of an offense by Mr. Epstein enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255. Response: Defend

EFTA00067399 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 65-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/25/2009 Page 3 of 37 Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein Page 3 DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES Interrogatory No. 1. Identify all employees who performed work of servi

CT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys,

2, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED F

admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Interrogatory No. 5. Identify all persons who came to the New Mexico Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatori

, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, physicians, hospitals and treatment facilities. No. 9. (Not at issue.)' List all items in Jeffrey Epstein's possession in Palm Beach, Florida, at any time during the period of these interrogatories, which were used or intended to be used as sexual aids, s

CT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES, and RESPONSES TO 1st and 2nd PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, AND INCORPORATED MEMO

2, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWE

9-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONS

name in an Indictment as victims of an offense by Mr. Epstein enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255. Request No. 2.

ons who came to the New York Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. No. 5. Identify all persons who came to the New Mexico Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. No. 6. Identify all persons who came to the St. Thomas Residence and who gave

s. V. PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO DEFENDANT'S HEALTH CARE INFORMATION IN DISCOVERY A. Interrogatory at Issue "Interrogatory No. 8. Identify all of Jeffrey Epstein's health care providers in the past (10) ten years, including without limitation, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, physician,

to Plaintiff's discovery requests. - 1 - EFTA00728201 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 57 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 2 of 16 II. EPSTEIN'S BLANKET ASSERTION OF PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION IN RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES IS INSUFFICIENT Defendant's response to each and every

cceptable). While Plaintiff does not dispute that Defendant Epstein's Fifth Amendment privilege may be asserted in a

-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPE

ame in an Indictment as victims of an offense by Mr. Epstein enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255. Response: Defend

admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Interrogatory No. 5. Identify all persons who came to the New Mexico Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatori

EFTA00222039 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 57-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 3 of 11 Jane Doe No. 2 1. Epstein Page 3 DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES Interrogatory No. 1. Identify all employees who performed work of servi

HERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, Defendant. DOCKET 912.6109 DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned attorneys,

STEIN, Plaintiff, Defendant. DOCKET 912.6109 DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED F

NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, Defendant. DOCKET 912.610

admissible evidence. Plaintiffs Complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004-2005." Interrogatory No. 5. Identify all persons who came to the New Mexico Residence and who gave a massage or were asked to give a massage to Defendant. Answer: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the interrogatori