Epstein Secrets

/NAPC=S&AccessionNo=GRDN000020110304e735000j4 • The Guardian, MEDIA Article.United Kingdom,Headline:Comment: Not quite a cannibal: Debating whether Prince Andrew's friend was a paedophile or not misses the point of exploitation. http://global.factiva.conVen/dufarticle.asp/NAPC=S&AccessionNo=GRDN000020110307e738

X RAP, http://global.factiva.com/en/dufarticle.asp?NAPC=S&AccessionNo=NYPO000020110225672p0001g • Daily Mail, MEDIA Article,United Kingdom:Headline:ANDREWS 4-DAY STAY WITH A SEX OFFENDER PRINCES CHOICE OF FRIENDS AGAIN CALLED INTO QUESTION, http: //g lobal. factiva .corn/en/d u/a aide .asp?NAPC =S&Acce

the paedophile are suddenly the talk of New York: The Duke of York's friendship with billionaire sex offender Jeffr

amp ROC Sutoatec Agreemat the inicanabon contaned in this document is b alert purposesonly ar4 is not tote used to' mimosasof oeleernntrg an 'NM d ?Agars angibiltrot any met of any Ma FCRA parmatobb papacies Use, further agrees to row soca matenal and intormanco n MtctMt canna/nee net to make tit.a tne

strong current media interest in the case. "British tabloids have gone berserk the past two weeks with the growing scandal over the friendship that Prince Andrew, 51, fourth in line for the throne, has maintained with the multimillionaire, a registered sex offender [Jeffrey Epstein]." Jose Lambiet, Prince's F

growing scandal over the friendship that Prince Andrew, 51, fourth in line for the throne, has maintaine

may be favorable to the defendant on the issues of guilty or punishment within the scope of Brady'. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and United States. Agars, 427 U.S. 97 (1976)." See, eg., Standing Discovery Order, United States. Enriquex, No. 1:10-CR-20488- MGC (July 9, 2010) (doc. #115). These Standing

ey's Office Southern District of New York 1 St. Andrew's Plaza New York, NY 10007 Re: United States v.

evidence, falls within Brady's definition of evidence favorable to the accused. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985); United States v. Agars, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). We also make the following specific Brady requests: I. Exculpatory Evidence: We request all such evidence requested above and e

ey's Office Southern District of New York 1 St. Andrew's Plaza New York, NY 10007 Re: United States v.

evidence, falls within Brady's definition of evidence favorable to the accused. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985); United States v. Agars, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). We also make the following specific Brady requests: I. Exculpatory Evidence: We request all such evidence requested above and e

ey's Office Southern District of New York 1 St. Andrew's Plaza New York, NY 10007 Re: United States v.

evidence, falls within Brady's definition of evidence favorable to the accused. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985); United States v. Agars, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). We also make the following specific Brady requests: I. Exculpatory Evidence: We request all such evidence requested above and e