Epstein Secrets

properties, inchiding Janusz Banasiak and Alfredo Rodriguez. I also know that NES regularly ee receives money

now fg that NES has several credit card accounts for the benefit of the persons who manage Mr. Epstcin’s Dy properties, inchiding Janusz Banasiak and Alfredo Rodriguez. I also know that NES regularly ee receives money from an account that is used to pay expenses at 358 El Brillo Way and also wires money to that same

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012671 2] 004/006 05/16/2008 11:16 FAX ioe 05/16/08 FRI 11:09 FAX 80 novel as to implicate the so-called “‘clear statement rule,” the Ex Post Facto clause, or the Due Process clause. As with the other legal issues, Mr. Acosta may elect to proceed with the case. Absence of coercion. With respect

home. As no one was home, a business card was left for him to return my call. We then traveled to 11349 SW 86th Lane in Miami in hopes to interview Alfredo Rodriguez, a former house man of Epstein. We did not locate them at home. I left a business card for him to return my call. We“then traveled todalaand met

EACH POLICE DEPARTMENT 'ime: 15:01:37 Page: 51 Incident Report Program: CMS301L 'ase No • 1-05-000368 (Continued) the previous houseman left. Rodriguez stated that it was his responsibility to keep the identity of the masseuses private. Mr. Epstein had a massage in the morning and one in the aftern

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361-39 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 4 of 6 so novel as to implicate the so-called "dear statement rule," the Ex Post Facto clause, or the Due Process clause. As with the other legal issues, Mr. =may elect to proceed with the case. Absence of coercion. With respect to 1

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

Document 29 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2009 Page 8 of 36 B. Masha's Law Does Not Apply To This Case. The presumption against retroactivity and the Ex Post Facto clause preclude application of Masha's Law in this case, where the alleged predicate conduct was completed before 2006. 1. Congress Dld Not Intend

son", United States Xidam , 84 F.3d 441, 442 (D.C. Cir. 1996)(per curiam , and "the safety of any other person and the community." United States I Rodriguez. 897 F. Supp. 1461, 1463 (S.D. Fla. 1995); IS U.S.C. § 3142(c). Cases Which Qualify For Detention Hearings: Section 3142(f) defines specific situa

ct future behavior *1039 and that the question is so vague as to be meaning- less. That calls into play the concept our Court of Appeals applied to the Ex Post Facto r Clause (albeit in a different con t from the present one) in United States Sutton, 521 F.2d 1385, 1390- (7th ir.1975) (quoting United State