Epstein Secrets

ES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee ROY BLACK ET AL., Intervenors-Appellants REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS NON-PARTY INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFEE, WEISSING EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. Paul G. Cassell Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellees Jane Doe No.1 and Jane Doe No. 2 EFT

the merits. DATED: July 16. 2013 Respectfully Submitted, Is/ Paul G. Cassell Paul G. Cassell and Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. Attorneys for Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2 I0 EFTA00209505 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The foregoing document was serv

respondence at issue was just "general discussions of leniency" or just "statements made in the hope" of avoiding indictment, he cannot contest the District Court's ruling. More troubling is the fact that Epstein has specifically represented to this Court that his position that the documents are "privileged and

occurs in the United States." Burnett II, 292 F.Supp2d at 19 n. 4 (quoting Tel-Oven v. Libyan Arab Republic, 726 F.24 774, 775 (D.C.Cir.1984)) (Edwards, J., concurring) (some emphasis omitted). Courts in the Second Circuit seem to take the opposite approach. "Although cast in terms that may be re

work's motion to dismiss Antiterrorism Act (ATA) suit by survivors of victims of September 11, 2001 attacks, as to which entities were subject to District Court's personal jurisdiction and whether entities transferred money to terror fronts. 18 U.S.C.A. § 2331 et seq.; Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 12(b)(2, 6), 28

cial effect. See Zackson, 12 F.3d at 1182. If requested, such evidence must be admitted with limiting instructions to the jury. See United States v. Edwards, 342 F.3d 168, 176 (2d Cir. 2003). The Second Circuit "ha[s] adopted an inclusionary approach to evaluating Rule 404(b) evidence, which allows evid

Rule 16 or by any means other than the Jencks Act." (Id.). See In re U.S., 834 F.2d 283, 284-87 (2d Cir. 1987) (issuing a writ of mandamus reversing District Court's order directing the Government to "produce all oral statements made by the defendants and coconspirators that the 55 EFTA00088857 Government pla

From: ' To:' )"H Subject: RE: Epstein Victim Impact Statements Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 17:48:04 +0000 - 15 Edwards clients present (and "at least 20 more who didn't make this hearing today for a multitude of reasons"), at 29 c. Jane Doe 1 o Jane Doe 2 o Jane D

tim Impact Statements Importance: High The Petitioner in the Epstein CVRA case has filed an appeal to the 11th Circuit. One of their issues is the District Court's refusal to hold a hearing allowing the Epstein victims to "have their day in court." The Court's ruling is, in part, on the basis that a hearing hel