Epstein Secrets

REBNICK, KORNSPAN & STUMPF, P.A. n By /S/ 1 ROY BLACK, ESQ. Florida Bar No. 126088 JACKIE PERCZEK, ES

sentence that will be imposed."' Plea negotiations implicate significant constitutional and policy considerations. The plaintiffs argue that under Weatherford Bursey, "there is no constitutional right to plea bargain," but that is not what the case held. What the Supreme Court actually said is that there

JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 v. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S RESPONSE TO SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO INTERVENE OF ROY BLACK. MARTIN WEINBERG, AND JAY LEFKOWITZ COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel,

stitutional considerations" that supposedly undergird plea bargain, the simple fact remains that "there is no constitutional right to plea bargain." Weatherford v. Bursey, 429 U.S. 545, 561 (1977). The Court should not exalt to privileged status negotiations that merely serve the administrative convenience

previously received from Epstein in their civil case in their CVRA case. DE 51. On April 7, 2011, Epstein's criminal defense attorneys — appellants Roy Black and Martin Weinberg — filed a motion for limited intervention in the case, arguing that their right to confidentiality in the correspondence would b

arn about negotiation on the subject of notifications to crime victims. 4 It is well settled that "there is no constitution right to plea bargain." Weatherford I Bursey, 429 U.S. 545, 561 (1977). A copy of the victims' pleading is attached to this response at Attachment B. 6 Epstein has never contested th