Epstein Secrets

RINCESS CmfaPe. AJ41 112 a., kin inn t Cling lien. AShis i. vont 310 SO ICO. ttiti fel l053) 211-033 10S3) 211-011 migolifunpa tHrp (uulut) IP 3.EPSTEIN Royal Princess. Chiang Nal, J8/10/02 IIIIII/IllOtrOAIITO III041141; lit n.dlmnm ellissui o1Da 0.04:41,40 sotoo 12:51 bit (013) 211 -033 WOW (03

in a to 1 $11702 Guest's signature Dale EFTA00188680 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 310-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/06/2015 Page 20 of 28 11 J.EP.STEIN Royal Princess, Chiang Nal, 19/10/02 13:07 ROYAL PRINCESS O94/4 Alm I U Camir, lJan 114.4. Mon( I)44. A M.A.,. O4.4..44 W1O.4 TA: (0331 201.033

w about if I call you at 2 tomorrow? 1. The CVRA case is a Complaint about whether certain statutory rights were violated by the Govt. The Govt not JE is the defendant. Whether JD 3 or JD 4 are or are not victims is not the test of whether they are proper petitioners: they also must allege a basis

. . in the original pleading." Because the original petition in this case alleged that the Government violated the rights of all the girls who were Jeffrey Epstein's victims, the proposed amendment in this case would relate back to the date the petition was filed: July 7, 2008. This relation back eliminates any s

ered on FLSD Docket 02/06/2015 Page 24 of 28 1, SHOPPERS TRAVEL, INC. SHOPPERS TRAVEL AGENT RS/RS BOOKING RFF ZXL1 07 303 5TH AVENUE NEW YORK J EPSTEIN 457 MADISON AVE 4TH FLOOR NEWYORK NY 10027 DATE: SEP 27 2002 DOE 3 RECORD TERMS; PAYMENT OUE UPON PRESENTATION SINGAPORE AIRLINES 27SEP NEW

nt violated the rights of all the girls who were Jeffrey Epstein's victims, the proposed amendment in this

e entire agreement between the United States and Mr. Epstein." DE 290-I at 3 (emphasis added). This descriptio

any duty or obligation to any victim or other person for the breach of which the United States ... could be held liable in damages."); Cunningham. U.S Dept of Justice, 961 F. Supp. 2d. 226 (D.D.C. 2013) ("[The] CVRA expressly disallows a suit for damages against the federal government or its officials . . . and Mr

oceed. The Court should uphold BOP's logical and plausible reliance on Exemption 7(A). BOP's reliance on Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to protect images of Epstein's body and the names of his associates was also proper. Epstein's surviving family member retains a privacy interest in the details of Epstein's su

Cir. 2017) 11, 12 Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. DHS, 384 F. Supp. 2d 100 (D.D.C. 2005) 14 EPA v. Mink, 410 U.S. 73 (1973) 17 Frontier Found. v. U.S Dept of Justice, 739 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2014) 17, 18 Garcia v. U.S. Dept of Justice, Office of Information and Privacy, 181 F. Supp. 2d 356 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) 15 H

oceed. The Court should uphold BOP's logical and plausible reliance on Exemption 7(A). BOP's reliance on Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to protect images of Epstein's body and the names of his associates was also proper. Epstein's surviving family member retains a privacy interest in the details of Epstein's su

Cir. 2017) 11, 12 Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. DHS, 384 F. Supp. 2d 100 (D.D.C. 2005) 14 EPA v. Mink, 410 U.S. 73 (1973) 17 Frontier Found. v. U.S Dept of Justice, 739 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2014) 17, 18 Garcia v. U.S. Dept of Justice, Office of Information and Privacy, 181 F. Supp. 2d 356 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) 15 H

oceed. The Court should uphold BOP's logical and plausible reliance on Exemption 7(A). BOP's reliance on Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to protect images of Epstein's body and the names of his associates was also proper. Epstein's surviving family member retains a privacy interest in the details of Epstein's su

Cir. 2017) 11, 12 Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. DHS, 384 F. Supp. 2d 100 (D.D.C. 2005) 14 EPA v. Mink, 410 U.S. 73 (1973) 17 Frontier Found. v. U.S Dept of Justice, 739 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2014) 17, 18 Garcia v. U.S. Dept of Justice, Office of Information and Privacy, 181 F. Supp. 2d 356 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) 15 H