Epstein Secrets

f. File 300 November 29, 2004 Dot. On November 29, 2004 I reviewed an intelligence report completed by Officer regarding According the report, Alfredo Rodriguez, who is the property manager for 358 El Brillo Way, which is the residence of Jeffrey Epstein, responded to the Police station to report that a sus

of the residence. Upon arrival, Off. came into contact with who advised that she was there to pick up an envelope from the homeowner (Epstein). Rodriguez stated that Epstein did leave an envelope for land went inside to retrieve it. While waiting, received a phone call and stated, "I can't talk, I c

ity of Bellingham 780 P,2d 272, 275-76 (Wash. App. 1989) (collecting cases). See also Bur. of Nat'l Affairs v. U.S. Delft. of Justice 742 F.3d 1484 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (holding that personal appointment materials, such as calendars and daily agendas for the convenience of Assistant Attorney General, are not

s acts intentionally and purposefully in the disparate inclusion or exclusion." United States I. lordm, 915 F.2d 622, 628 (11th Cir. 1990) (quoting Rodriguez,. United States, 480 U.S. 522, 525 (1987) (itself quoting Russell° I. United States 464 U.S. 16, 23 (1983))). There is no basis for departing from

09). Courts have long consulted official CRS summariesto assess legislative intent, see, e.g., &nig Pension Ben. Guar. Com. 744 F.2d 133, 145 & n.7 (D.C. Cir. 1984); fIRECI'V Inc. I. Cignarella No. I. Civ.A 03-2384, 2005 W 1252261 at *7 (D.N.J. May 24, 2005); Clokesav St. Francis Hoso. & Healthcare No.

rod. Co. v. Adair, 764 F.3d 347 (4th Cir. 2014); Rodriguez v. Nat'l City Bank, 726 F.3d 372, 376 (3d Cir. 20

that Wal- Mart provided the basis for a renewed class certification motion); DL v. District of Columbia, 713 F.3d 120, 126, 404 U.S. App. D.C. 316 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (surveying how Wal-Mart has changed the class action landscape); Elizabeth Tippett, Robbing A Barren Vault: The Implications of Dukes v. Wal

THIS CASE Plaintiff does not seriously contest that the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 32 and Fed. R. Evid. 804 cannot be met with respect to Mr. Rodriguez's deposition testimony. Indeed, the Plaintiff's Motions to Exclude Designation of Depositions Excerpts of Alan Dershowitz and Plaintiff argued this

e of the jury and thereby substitute his spoken word for the written document.") (italics in original). Gaines v. United States, 349 F.2d 190, 192 (D.C. Cir. I965)(error to allow prior written statement to be read to the witness in front of the jury for the purpose of refreshing recollection because "it