Epstein Secrets

tion of Epstein's federal case, on July 3, 2008, attorney Edwards sent a letter to the U.S. Attorney's Office comm

stitutional principle of separation of powers. Attorneys and Law Firms *1198 Paul Cassell, University of Utah College of Law, SALT LAKE CITY, UT, Bradley James Edwards, EdwardsPottinger, LLC, FORT LAUDERDALE, FL, for Petitioner. Richard Christian Komando, Bradley Garrison & Komando, ORANGE PARK, FL, for Amicus C

her. The U.S. Attorney's Office continued to conceal the existence of the NPA from all the victims for months to come. In mid- June *1233 of 2008, Bradley Edwards, the Fort Lauderdale, Florida attorney for several of Epstein's victims, contacted AUSA Villafana to inform her that he represented Jane Doe I and

for several of Epstein's victims, contacted AUSA Villafana to inform her that he represented Jane Doe I and, later, Jane Doe 2. AUSA Villafana and Edwards discussed the possibility of federal charges being filed against Epstein in the future. Edwards was led to believe that federal charges could stil

mless" is an odd statutory interpretation. The Majority's faulty interpretation actually makes this part of the venue provision superfluous. See ?. Corley v. United States, 556 U.S. 303, 314, 129 S. Ct. 1558, 1566, 173 L.Ed.2d 443 (2009) ("[O]ne of the most basic interpretive canons [is] that a statu

the penalty or punishment for the alleged crime. U.S. Const. Art. 1, §9, cl. 3, §10, cl. L U.S. v. Seigel, 153 F.3d 1256 (11th Cir. 1998); U.S. v. Edwards, 162 F.3d 87 (3d Cir. 1998); and generally, Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. 386, 390, 1 L.Ed. 648, 1798 WL 587 (Calder) (1798). The United States Constituti

d by CM/ECF on this t5 day of March, 2010: Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein Brad Edwards, Esq. Fanner, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, PL ounse or ant in e a e ase No. 084089-3 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice EFTA00

-02 at 58016 (July 20, 2006) (statement of Sen. Kerry) (emphasis added). Courts typically give special weight to the statements of a bill's sponsor, Corley v. U.S„ 129 S.Ct. 1558, 1569 (Apr. 6, 2009) ("[A] sponsor's statement to the full Senate carries considerable weight").4 There is no basis to depar

in, 08-CV-80893-KAM: This suit was filed by one of the victims who brought the victim's rights suit against the United States. She is represented by Brad Edwards. The Complaint raises the following claims: sexual exploitation, sexual abuse and/or sexual assault of a minor (Count 1), "Cause of Action pursuant

st the United States. She is represented by Brad Edwards. The Complaint raises the following claims: sexua

-02 at 58016 (July 20, 2006) (statement of Sen. Kerry) (emphasis added). Courts typically give special weight to the statements of a bill's sponsor, Corley'. U.S. 129 -5- Cast No. 08.80736-CV-MARRA P-011846 EFTA00192892 Case 9:09-cv-80591-KAM Document 29 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2009 Page 6 o

vania and New York relied heavily on private prosecutors for criminal law enforcement before 1850. See Stewart v. Sonneborn, 98 U.S. 187, 198 (1879) (Bradley, J., dissenting) ("Every man in the community, if he has probable cause for prosecuting another, has a perfect right, by law, to institute such prose

9, 190 (S.C. 1845) (affirming that private individuals may file criminal or civil actions for the same offense but must elect the form before trial); Corley v. Williams, 17 S.C.L. (1 Bail.) 588, 588-89 (S.C. 1830) (providing an example of private prosecution). Pennsylvania and New York relied heavily on p

Seigel, 153 F.3d 1256 (I Ith Cir. 1998); U.S. v. Edwards, 162 F.3d 87 (3d Cir. 1998); and generally, Cald

ial weight to the statements of a bill's sponsor, Corley v. U.S., 129 S.Ct. 1558, 1569 (Apr. 6, 2009) ("[

TRUE 680, LLC KING,GIOCONDA ST EDWARDS RECTORY BELL JR,LOWRY M 375 SOUTH C

HARPER,MARY LEE FLINT,DAVID WORLEY,CHRISTINA FRAZEE,LORETTA NEITHOLD,C