Epstein Secrets

ns (e.g. the Rolling Stone and the University of Virginia) that you test Jane Doe 3's allegations about for

in. I have been informed by Producer James Hill that an interview, conducted by a Good Morning America co-host, of a woman known in court papers as Jane Doe 3 (Mr. Hill informed me that she was waiving whatever rights to anonymity she might assert but I will, because of certain legal obligations, refer to

usations are even potentially newsworthy matters rather than simply the reformatted echoes of previous allegations, first made to the UK tabloids by Jane Doe 3 in 2011, allegations that were and remain largely uncorroborated, aleegations that are often disputed by trustworthy evidence. A review of the filin

ve funds herself) from a businessperson who would persuasively deny that he ever had any sexual contact with Jane Doe 3. Likewise, Prince Andrew and the Royal Palace have unequivocally denied similar allegations of sexual conduct by Prince Andrew. Surely there is nothing in the background of either the Prince or

conducted by a Good Morning America co-host, of a woman known in court papers as Jane Doe 3.' I write to put you on notice that ABC's publication of Jane Doe 3's accusations is grossly negligent or worse. The accusations, many of which relate to my client, relate to alleged conduct that occurred approximatel

e. Upon inquiry, I am certain that you would receive similar denials from Mr. and Mrs. Gore either directly or by or through their counsel Mr. Boies. Jane Doe 3's fabrication of these claims against respected former officials undermines completely the trustworthiness of each and every one of her remaining alleg

ressured into including Professor Dershowitz in her allegations and that she has a financial motive in making these allegations. The Duke of York and the Royal Palace have likewise unequivocally denied Jane Doe's similar allegations against the Duke. Surely, these unequivocal statements of denial of respected membe

r, uncorroborated allegations with extreme caution. At the very least, ABC has an obligation to verify—with independent evidence—the truthfulness of Jane Doe 3's claims. Merely declining to air those portions of her interview that relate to President Clinton and Vice-President Gore is insufficient. If ABC ha

legations involving students at the University of Virginia, ABC would proceed with similar, uncorroborated

ssured into including Professor Dershowitz in her allegations and that she has a financial motive in making these allegations. The Duke of York and the Royal Palace have likewise unequivocally denied Jane Doe's similar allegations against the Duke. Surely, these unequivocal statements of denial of respected mem

usations are even potentially newsworthy matters rather than simply the reformatted echoes of previous allegations, first made to the UK tabloids by Jane Doe 3 in 2011, allegations that were and remain largely uncorroborated, aleegations that are often disputed by trustworthy evidence. A review of the filin

ns (e.g. the Rolling Stone and the University of Virginia) that you test Jane Doe 3's allegations about for

ly there is nothing in the background of Professor Dershowitz that would make him less credible than their uncorroborated accuser Prince Andrew and the Royal Palace have also unequivocally denied similar allegations of sexual conduct by Prince Andrew. Their denials as well are entitled to weight in your determi

usations are even potentially newsworthy matters rather than simply the reformatted echoes of previous allegations, first made to the UK tabloids by Jane Doe 3 in 2011, allegations that were and remain largely uncorroborated, aleegations that are often disputed by trustworthy evidence. A review of the filin

ns (e.g. the Rolling Stone and the University of Virginia) that you test Jane Doe 3's allegations about for

ly there is nothing in the background of Professor Dershowitz that would make him less credible than their uncorroborated accuser Prince Andrew and the Royal Palace have also unequivocally denied similar allegations of sexual conduct by Prince Andrew. Their denials as well are entitled to weight in your determi