Epstein Secrets

people that Epstein alleges in his Complaint had "no connection whatsoever" with the litigation in this case. See, e.g., Journal, Exhibit F, at 85 (Donald Trump); at 9 8 EFTA00726006 (Bill Clinton phone numbers listed under "Doug Bands"). Federal Investigation and Plea ARreement With Epstein 19. In app

deposition of Donald Trump. Edwards possessed a legitimate basis for doing so: (a) The message pads confiscated from Epstein's home indicated that Trump called Epstein's West Palm Beach mansion on several occasions during the time period most relevant to my clients' complaints; (b) Trump was quoted

this case. See, e.g., Journal, Exhibit F, at 85 (Donald Trump); at 9 8 EFTA00726006 (Bill Clinton pho

ed that Jane Doe 102 was initially approached at Trump's Maralago by Ohislaine Maxwell and recruited to be

does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in respqmLwprobative evidence offered against them." Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308, 318 (1976); accord v. State, 777 So.2d 1200, 1203 (Fla. App. 2001). The reason for this rule "is both logical and utilitarian. A pa

tion. The undisputed facts show the following with regard to each of the persons raised in Epstein's complaint: • Complaint ¶38(i): With regard to Donald Trump, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing Mr. Trump had relevant and discoverable information. See Statement of Undisputed Facts. • Complaint

ach of the persons raised in Epstein's complaint: • Complaint ¶38(i): With regard to Donald Trump, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing Mr. Trump had relevant and discoverable information. See Statement of Undisputed Facts. • Complaint ¶38(ii): With regard to Alan Dershowitz (Harvard Law Pro

s complaint: • Complaint ¶38(i): With regard to Donald Trump, Edwards had sound legal basis for believi

ump, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing Mr. Trump had relevant and discoverable information. See St

not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them." Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308, 318 (1976); accord Vasquez v. State, 777 So.2d 1200, 1203 (Fla. App. 2001). The reason for this rule "is both logical and utilitarian

tion (discussed below), he frequently traveled around the globe in the company of such famous persons as President Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and Donald Trump. It is therefore reasonable to infer that he has international contacts, including international financial contacts. See Affidavit of Paul Cassell

President Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and Donald Trump. It is therefore reasonable to infer that he has

ons as President Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and Donald Trump. It is therefore reasonable to infer that

e to permit an adverse inference to be drawn from exercise of the privilege does not implicate the policy considerations underlying the privilege." Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S.308, 335 (1976). An adverse inference is entirely justified in this case. Epstein has remained silent when asked such straightforward requ

jet pilots about sexual activities on EPSTEIN's aircraft (¶ 32(1)); sending letters asking for deposition dat4 for the deposition of TV personality Donald Trump, law professor Alan Dcrshowitz, magician David Copperfield, and other individuals who were without any knowledge of relevant eviarnce about EPSTEIN

dat4 for the deposition of TV personality Donald Trump, law professor Alan Dcrshowitz, magician David C

sition dat4 for the deposition of TV personality Donald Trump, law professor Alan Dcrshowitz, magician D

plaintiff's answers can be used against him through adverse inferences. See, e.g , In re J.E.B., 971 So.2d 187, 188 (Fla.App. 2 Dist. 2007) (citing Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308 (1976) ("[T]he Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civ I actions when they refuse to testify in res