Epstein Secrets

R•abed L Jeffs "nanekx. SUNSI R But MA Chnses0 W. Carper Yvon 0. Donau° James O G Ken Mary Kay G

G. Cassell to practice law. Board of Comrnssalonon Sttdmin OaPf it PrnKlyne R•abed L Jeffs "nanekx. SUNSI R But MA Chnses0 W. Carper Yvon 0. Donau° James O G Ken Mary Kay Golan, CPA Gunn M Jenson Pamela* Kym Lon W NOlson Herm Oxen BCctl R. UGH Tbrarms IN Stier Rodney G Snow E RASO mew

9 complaint against Bradley Edwards that III., E.W. or 24 Jane Doe voluntarily consented to their s

if it happened it's relevant to 5 proving that it had happened to your client. 4 The whole point is to prove that it / happened to your client, Donau.* it happened to • other people. And the circumstances, if they can be • similar, that helps as wall. 10 II • You spoke about modus operandi.

Bant ice m abler ce sulbdunes. awn Isseornenty b W. beton Me Iran Me named mount hoer Or inform:on co

your Pommy Offset FDIC Unless netiLL te the convey on s goncanif cam in securities and financial murrenne presented boom sr* not mend by IM federal Donau I menus Cerporanen VPDIC-1. sn rof guaranteed by. nor ases oinnalsona of. ~WA* Sank AG es any et se anew of subsidence. and an cutout to invelmenl m

•••••••haiire 16••••••• WO, Ma • V Matt\I WaVAW.W..", O.W.NiNeAr.., Al•V•AV At., OA • • v.A FA. sa

EY l EPSTEIN HOUSEHOLD ACCOUNT Ma RMHO WAY Plat wenn am 1045 Date 9/2z/as 1"°= Ordetor Newly $ / SOO I One -BleUsas• Afardeed ett 40 Donau CCOli ONIAL °AMC.. doratert:VANna 406311322 b: 8041301022N 1065 "moo Ls0000, cream • .1 wiz •ria lIE 1fr Ara 9:11"EtaSZTS01 4sa8770 . I htt

as to confer a benefit on the third party." Fla. W. Intl Ainvays, Inc., 853 F. Supp. 2d at 1228 (quot

Thus, the defendant's claim that she no longer has access to certain evidence is not a proper basis to dismiss the Indictment. See United States v. Donau, 356 F. Supp. 1091, 1094 (S.D.N.Y. 1973) ("A bare allegation that records have been lost or destroyed, which might relate Ig The Government notes t

as to confer a benefit on the third party." Fla. W. Intl Ainvays, Inc., 853 F. Supp. 2d at 1228 (quot

Thus, the defendant's claim that she no longer has access to certain evidence is not a proper basis to dismiss the Indictment. See United States v. Donau, 356 F. Supp. 1091, 1094 (S.D.N.Y. 1973) ("A bare allegation that records have been lost or destroyed, which might relate Ig The Government notes t