Epstein Secrets

10 reveals that Plaintiff alleges with whom Defendant conspired, stating that he "conspired with others, including his assistants Sarah Kellen and Nadia Marcinkova, to further commit these acts and to avoid police detection." See ¶ 15. Additionally, Plaintiff sufficiently alleges the identity of the other mino

, including his assistants Sarah Kellen and Nadia Marcinkova, to further commit these acts and to avoid polic

others, including his assistants Sarah Kellen and Nadia Marcinkova, to further commit these acts and to

nner v. City of Pritchard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1207 & 1209 (11i° Cir. 1981) (en bane), the Eleventh Circuit adopted as binding precedent the decisions of the Fifth Circuit rendered prior to October 1, 1981. 3 EFTA_R1_00012688 EFTA01734468 Case 9:08-cv-80893-KAM Document 125 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/0312010 Page

33 10 id. 12 13 14 L5 16 ne) 18 life) 20 21 22 23 24 25 131 H3vlgiu2 THE COURT: What's next? MR. CASSELL: The motion on Kellen and Marcinkova, our motion to get in adverse inferenc THI Gi COURT: Yes. MR. CASSELL: If I can be heard on that, your Honor. THI ES COURT: Excuse me. Let me

ese two have been difficult to reach by subpoena, that's why we've taken their deposition. And so Mr. Epstein will testify live, he would invoke, Nadia Marcinkova and Sarah Kellen, the deposition has already been taken. And in our —- THI Gl COURT: What do you do about the statement that counsel just made a

Mr. Epstein will testify live, he would invoke, Nadia Marcinkova and Sarah Kellen, the deposition has a

of Maryland. That's a Fifth Circuit case from 1995, in which a bank officer was accused of dishonest and fraudulent acts and kind of bogus loans, and the Fifth Circuit allowed, Fifth Amendment invocations from the loan recipients to be used against him, reasoning that, well, in this kind of a case, the collusion t

idence. Another female, named Natasha, Natalia or Nadia LNU, who was described as tall with straight bro

e Constitution. Even in the case of In re Dean, 527 F.3d 391 (5th Cir. 2008), upon which the plaintiffs rely, the district court, after remand from the Fifth Circuit, denied the motion of the victims to invalidate the defendant's plea agreement as a remedy for the claimed violation of the Crime Victims' Rights A