Epstein Secrets

d States respectfully requests that the Court deny the Motion to Quash and order the prompt compliance with the subpoenas. Respectfully submitted, R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: A. Assistant United States Attorney Florida Bar 500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 T

subpoenas. Respectfully submitted, R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: A. Assistant Unite

ge on a document by document basis explaining how the production of that document would tend to incriminate the target. See, e.g., United States v. Grable , 98 F.3d 251, 255, 257 (6 di Cir. 1996) ("The existence of `substantial and real hazards of self-incrimination' is a prerequisite to the proper ass

d States respectfully requests that the Court deny the Motion to Quash and order the prompt compliance with the subpoenas. Respectfully submitted, R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: Assistant United States Attorney ou u an venue, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: Facsimile: E-mail

subpoenas. Respectfully submitted, R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: Assistant United St

tem called for in the subpoena." (Epstein Reply at 6.) -2- EFTA01728791 document would tend to incriminate the target. See, e.g., United States v. Grable, 98 F.3d 251, 255, 257 (6 h Cir. 1996) ("The existence of `substantial and real hazards of self-incrimination' is a prerequisite to the proper asse

Ile...LeneA nein Black srcbmck. Kornsparl & Stumpf EFTA00179082 U.S. Department Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY VIA FACSIMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq. Fowler White Burnett 1395 Brickell Ave Fl 14 Miami Florida 33131-3300 Re: Jeffre

ANN SANCHEZ, ESQ. AUGUST 3, 2007 PAGE 2 Please let us know your client's decision by no later than August 17. I have conferred with U.S. Attorney Acosta who has asked me to communicate that the two-year term of incarceration is a non-negotiable minimum to vindicate a federal interest, and, at this ti

tem called for in the subpoena." (Epstein Reply at 6.) -2- EFTA00179087 document would tend to incriminate the target. See, e.g., United States v. Grable, 98 F.3d 251, 255, 257 (6 11' Cir. 1996) ("The existence of `substantial and real hazards of self-incrimination' is a prerequisite to the proper as