Epstein Secrets

ise for gain, benefit, advantage or livelihood" (Black's Law Dictionary (7th ed. 2007)) or as "a usually

eatedly delivered to Mr. Epstein in small denominations in duffel bags and boxes. See, e.g., Puche, supra, 350 F. 3d 1137; see also United States v. Rahseparian, 231 F. 3d 1257 (10th Cir. 2000) (government failed to prove that defendant knew that money was obtained by mail fraud, the unlawful activity under

ise for gain, benefit, advantage or livelihood" (Black's Law Dictionary (7th ed. 2007)) or as "a usually

eatedly delivered to Mr. Epstein in small denominations in duffel bags and boxes. See, e.g., Puche, supra, 350 F. 3d 1137; see also United States v. Rahseparian, 231 F. 3d 1257 (10th Cir. 2000) (government failed to prove that defendant knew that money was obtained by mail fraud, the unlawful activity under

ise for gain, benefit, advantage or livelihood" (Black's Law Dictionary (7th ed. 2007)) or as "a usually

eatedly delivered to Mr. Epstein in small denominations in duffel bags and boxes. See, e.g., Puche, supra, 350 F. 3d 1137; see also United States v. Rahseparian, 231 F. 3d 1257 (10th Cir. 2000) (government failed to prove that defendant knew that money was obtained by mail fraud, the unlawful activity under

ack, Esq. Black Srebnick 1Cornspan & Stumpf PA 201 S. Biscayne Blvd, Suite 1300 Miami, FL 33131 Re: Correspondence Dated July 13, 2007 Dear Mr. Black: Thank you for your letter ofJuly 13, 2007. You and your firm are neither a subpoenaedparty nor counsel to a subpoenaed parry. Accordingly, pursuan

epeatedly delivered to Mr. Epstein in small denominations in duffel bags and boxes. See, e.g.. Puche, supra, 350, 3d 1137; see also United States v. Rahseparian, 231 k3d 1257 (10th Cir. 2000) (government failed to prove that defendant knew that money was o tained by mail fraud, the unlawful activi