Epstein Secrets

ed that the names of girls on the handwritten lists came from his personal notes regarding payments he had made to girls during his employment with PSTEIN. RODRIGUEZ e plained that EPSTEIN would instruct him to •o to the bank and w hdraw a specified amount of funds. or GHISLAINE ELL would then inst

of birth , was contacted by Alfredo Rodriguez, date of birth . Edwards is an attorney who is representing four fema e in ividuals who are suing Jeffrey Epstein. Rodriguez was an employee for Epstein. Edward's deposed Rodriguez and served him with a federal subpoena to provide any and all documents relatin

, date of birth . Edwards is an attorney who is representing four fema e in ividuals who are suing Jeffrey Epstein. Rodriguez was an employee for Epstein. Edward's deposed Rodriguez and served him with a federal subpoena to provide any and all documents relating to the case. Rodriguez is trying to se

he following information. RODRIGUEZ advised that he had been told by GHISLAINE ELL not to disc s what had occurred at the home of his farmer oyer, JEFFERY STEIN approximately 3-4 months after he was fired from his po ition as house manager in March 2005. RODRIGUEZ further advised hat MAXWELL also told him n

presenting four fema e in ividuals who are suing Jeffrey Epstein. Rodriguez was an employee for Epstein.

e came before this Court on the Government's Motion to Seal. The Court being fully advised in the premises, it is hereby: ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Government's Motion is hereby granted, and the Clerk of the Court shall seal the Complaint, Affidavit, and Arrest Warrant (with the exception of providing a copy of th

DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant MOTION OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN FOR PROSPECTIVE LIMITED INTERVENTION AT THE REMEDY STAGE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS Jeffrey Epstein hereby moves, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 24(a)(2) a

the stage at which the Court will consider what remedy to order if it finds that the government violated the plaintiffs' rights under the CVRA. Mr. Epstein does not seek to intervene generally in the case, as the duties and obligations imposed by the CVRA apply solely to the government; the statutory r

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant MOTION OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN FOR PROSPECTIVE LIMITED INTERVENTION AT

violated the plaintiffs' rights under the CVRA. Mr. Epstein does not seek to intervene generally in the case,

ciently concretized for seeking intervention to contest the rescission remedy sought by plaintiffs.' A motion to intervene before the Court ruled on the Government's Motion to Dismiss which focused, in part, on the question whether rescission was an available remedy at all, would have been premature. Since Mr. Epstein

DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant MOTION OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN FOR PROSPECTIVE LIMITED INTERVENTION AT THE REMEDY STAGE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS Jeffrey Epstein hereby moves, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 24(a)(2) a

the stage at which the Court will consider what remedy to order if it finds that the government violated the plaintiffs' rights under the CVRA. Mr. Epstein does not seek to intervene generally in the case, as the duties and obligations imposed by the CVRA apply solely to the government; the statutory r

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant MOTION OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN FOR PROSPECTIVE LIMITED INTERVENTION AT

violated the plaintiffs' rights under the CVRA. Mr. Epstein does not seek to intervene generally in the case,

ciently concretized for seeking intervention to contest the rescission remedy sought by plaintiffs.' A motion to intervene before the Court ruled on the Government's Motion to Dismiss which focused, in part, on the question whether rescission was an available remedy at all, would have been premature. Since Mr. Epstein

to obtain discovery from the Government." DE 129 at 2-3. Now, one year and one day later, the Government's strategy (aided by parallel motions from Jeffrey Epstein) continues to effectively block the victims from obtaining discovery and learning what happened during the Government's plea negotiations with the m

strategy (aided by parallel motions from Jeffrey Epstein) continues to effectively block the victims from

nment's strategy (aided by parallel motions from Jeffrey Epstein) continues to effectively block the victi

TAY COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to request an expedited ruling on the Government's Motion to Stay. The Government's motion was filed more than one year ago, yet (presumably because of a flurry of other motions) the Court has yet to rule

to obtain discovery from the Government." DE 129 at 2-3. Now, one year and one day later, the Government's strategy (aided by parallel motions from Jeffrey Epstein) continues to effectively block the victims from obtaining discovery and learning what happened during the Government's plea negotiations with the m

strategy (aided by parallel motions from Jeffrey Epstein) continues to effectively block the victims from

nment's strategy (aided by parallel motions from Jeffrey Epstein) continues to effectively block the victi

TAY COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to request an expedited ruling on the Government's Motion to Stay. The Government's motion was filed more than one year ago, yet (presumably because of a flurry of other motions) the Court has yet to rule