Epstein Secrets

barrass Mr. Epsteil" I But records show ihat Reiter wrote Krischer on May 1 :- -- I wellbefor.e the case went to the grand jµry - suggesting that Ktischer "consider if good and sufficie•nt reason exists tb· require your disqi.rn,ll'ffcation from the prosecutionofthese ~ases/' Rather than flat-.out de

. On May 1, 2006, Town of Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter wrote a “personal and confidential” letter to then Palm Beach County State Attorney, Barry Krischer, stating: I must renew my prior observation to you that I continue to find your office’s treatment of [the Epstein] cases highly unusual. It is regre

cient reason exists to requireyour disqualificationfrom theprosecution ofthese cases. (Emphasis supplied) 17. Chief Reiter’s letter to State Attorney Krischer enclosed the Town of Palm Beach Police Department’s probable cause affidavits charging Epstein and two of his assistants with multiple counts of unla

e Epstein with 'unlawful sex acts with a minor and' lewd,an:d.iasciyiousmolestation. Police Chief Mich~el R,eiter·was s.o angry with State Attorney Barry 'Kris\;:her's ha·ndling.of the case-that he. wro.te a meino suggesting .the county's top ptosecutot disqualify himself. "Jmµsturge you to examine the unusual

s crimes of unlawful sex acts with a minor and lewd and lascivious molestation. Police Chief Michael Reiter was so angry that he wrote State Attorney Barry Krischer a memo in May suggesting'he disqualify himself from the case. i https://wvzw.paimbeachclailynews.com/article/20060729/NEWS/190917573' 1/4 CA

(“Where a speaker exists . . . the protection afforded [by the First Amendment] is to the communication, to its source and to its recipients both.”); Pittman v. Cole, 267 F.3d 1269, 1283 n. 12 (11th Cir. 2001) (“The Supreme Court has recognized that the First Amendment offers protection to both speakers an

or “we will consider it a breach ofthe agreement and proceed accordingly.” Villafafia further advised her superior: “Someone really needs to talk to Barry [Krischer].” Appendix at 3 (OPR Report, p. 109). I ! Greenberg Traurlg, PA ■401 East Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 2000 ■Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33301 ■Tel 954:765

4:10:49 PM 11. On May 1, 2006, Town of Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter wrote a “personal and confidential” letter to former State Attorney Krischer, stating: I must renew my prior observation to you that I continue to find your office’s treatment of [the Epstein] cases highly unusual. It is regre

ndment right to report information informing the public about the operation of the criminal justice system. See Va. Pharmacy Bd., 425 U.S. at 756-57; Pittman, 267 F.3d at 1283; Richmond Newspapers, 448 U.S. at 596 (“the 5 No-knock warrants have been banned in Florida since 1994. See Slate y. Bamber, 630 So

(“Where a speaker exists . . . the protection afforded [by the First Amendment] is to the communication, to its source and to its recipients both.”), Pittman v. Cole, 267 F.3d 1269, 1283 n.12 (11th Cir. 2001) (“The Supreme Court has recognized that the First Amendment offers protection to both speakers and

On May 1, 2006, Town of Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter wrote a “personal and confidential” letter to then Palm Beach County State Attorney, Barry Krischer, stating: I must renew my prior observation to you that I continue to find your office’s treatment of [the Epstein] cases highly unusual. It is r

eason exists to require your disqualification from the prosecution of these cases. (Emphasis supplied) 14. Chief Reiter’s letter to State Attorney Krischer enclosed the Town of Palm Beach Police Department’s probable cause affidavits charging Epstein and two of his assistants with multiple counts of un

crimes of unlawful sex acts with a minor and lewd and lascivious molestation. Police Chief Michael Reiter was so angry that he wrote State Attorney Barry Krischer a memo in May suggesting he disqualify himself from the case. https://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/article/20060729/NEWS/190917573 1/4 N

“Where a speaker exists . . . the protection afforded [by the First Amendment] is to the communication, to its source and to its recipients both.”); Pittman v. Cole, 267 F.3d 1269, 1283 n.12 (11th Cir. 2001) (“The Supreme Court has recognized that the First Amendment offers protection to both speakers a

. On May 1, 2006, Town of Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter wrote a “personal and confidential” letter to then Palm Beach County State Attorney, Barry Krischer, stating: I must renew my prior observation to you that I continue to find your office’s treatment of [the Epstein] cases highly unusual. It is regre

cient reason exists to requireyour disqualificationfrom theprosecution ofthese cases. (Emphasis supplied) 17. Chief Reiter’s letter to State Attorney Krischer enclosed the Town of Palm Beach Police Department’s probable cause affidavits charging Epstein and two of his assistants with i multiple counts of un

) (“Where a speaker exists ... the protection afforded [by the First Amendment] is to the communication, to its source and to its recipients both.”); Pittman v. Cole, 267 F.3d 1269, 1283 n.12 (11th Cir. 2001) (“The Supreme Court has recognized that the First Amendment offers protection to both speakers and