Epstein Secrets

ot to remember that it was the court that asked the record to be sealed and it was done during the course of the proceedings: said Epstein's lawyer Jack Goldenberger. Deanna Shullman. another attorney, weighed in as well. Shullman, representing the media and the public's right to see what's in those documents.

nment is doing its job," Post attorney Deanna Shullman said. "There is great public interest in how everybody in this case is doing their job." Goldberger argued that the confidential agreement Epstein struck with federal prosecutors shoukl remain confidential. Included in it, Goldberger said, are

view that won't be the end of it. "The invest' lion is very active and focused." he said, "so you'll see a second round in a timely manner." Mr. McAuliffe said the probe, which started in February likely would spread to new people and new offices in Palm Beach County. Mr. McAuliffe said that he's

obligations imposed under the (agreement)," he wrote in the suit. "Put simply, Epstein believes he is above the law." Neither his criminal attorney Jack Goldberger or his civil attorney Robert Critton was immediately available to comment on Podhurst's suit. Podhurst isn't the first to accuse Epstein of being u

ove the law." Neither his criminal attorney Jack Goldberger or his civil attorney Robert Critton was immediat

S. attorney or Palm Beach County State Attorney Michael McAuliffe to enforce the non- prosecution agreement. Federal prosecutors declined comment and McAuliffe wasn't immediately available. But, Marks said, a clear breach has occurred. In meetings to collect the fee, Marks said he has been amazed at Epstein

Page 1 of 2 Barbara Burns - • - From: Barbara Burns Sent: Thursday. April 01, 2010 8:49 AM To: 'Jack Goldberger' Cc: Michael McAuliffe Subject: RE: Epstein I shared your latest email with Mr. McAuliffe and we both agree that it is our position that he needs

nt: Thursday. April 01, 2010 8:49 AM To: 'Jack Goldberger' Cc: Michael McAuliffe Subject: RE: Epstein I

s Sent: Thursday. April 01, 2010 8:49 AM To: 'Jack Goldberger' Cc: Michael McAuliffe Subject: RE: Epstein I shared your latest email with Mr. McAuliffe and we both agree that it is our position that he needs to honor his commitment and complete his community control as agreed. if you feel it necessa

Public Records Request No. 19-372 Page 1 of 2 Barbara Burns - -- .. ~--------- From: Barbara Burns Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 8:49 AM To: 'Jack Goldberger' Cc: Michael McAuliffe Subject: RE: Epstein I shared your latest email with Mr. McAuliffe and we both agree that it is our position that he needs

nt: Thursday, April 01, 2010 8:49 AM To: 'Jack Goldberger' Cc: Michael McAuliffe Subject: RE: Epstein I

s Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 8:49 AM To: 'Jack Goldberger' Cc: Michael McAuliffe Subject: RE: Epstein I shared your latest email with Mr. McAuliffe and we both agree that it is our position that he needs to honor his commitment and complete his community control as agreed. If you feel it necessa

7.20 Florida BAWD. photo Inoue 3501.135091 2007.12.11 Letter to Aleondo Acacia from Kittens:la Ellis LIP 3501.135092 2008.03.20 Letter to lack Goldberger from Maim Kennon 3501.135093 2008.03.24 Victim list 3501.135.094 2008.07.03 Victim list 3501.135095 2008.07.10 Lefler told,/ Herman freer

3.22 Note**, Deemtion to 3501.225.110 2009.09.29 toner from Adam Norowit: to Judge leffrevColbath 3501225.111 2009.10.09 Fmal from to hlichaN McAuliffe and Paul lacks 3501225.112 2008.07.10 letter from to Jeffrey Norman 3501 225 113 2019 0709 302 report rNpeding attempted contact with 3501225

were already pending against lender in bankruptcy adversary proceeding. Fed. Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 23(bX3), 28 U.S.C.A. ARGUED: Daniel P. Shapiro, Goldberg, Kohn, Bell, Black, Rosenbloom & Moritz, Ltd, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellant. Gil- bert Scott Bagnell, Bagnell & Eason, L.L.C., Columbia, South

the exhibition or distribution of "Caligula" In the United States. Id. at 9. 5. We have no reason to question the district court's findings that McAuliffe has threatened to prosecute and that Penthouse cannot obtain an exhibitor in Fulton County. 6. Indeed, the Supreme Court has, In dicta, ad- dresse