Epstein Secrets

was excused from appearing before the grand jury and that Mr. Riley did not flout the subpoena by failing to appear. AUSA agreed with Attorney Mr. Black that Mr. Riley would not have to appear and produce the disputed items if a motion to quash all aspects of the subpoenas was filed. Neither party's

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

t that was excused from appearing before' the grand jury and that did not flout the subpoena by failing to appear. AUSA a greed with Attorney Mr. Black that would not have to appear and produce the disputed items if a motion to quash all aspects of the subpoenas was filed. Neither party's pleading

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

was excused from appearing before the grand jury and that Mr. Riley did not flout the subpoena by failing to appear. AUSA agreed with Attorney Mr. Black that Mr. Riley would not have to appear and produce the disputed items if a motion to quash all aspects of the subpoenas was filed. Neither party's

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