Epstein Secrets

to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. See Edwards Affidavit, Exhibit "N" at 117. 75. Epstein also takes issue with Edwards identifying Bill Richardson as a possible witness. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Ep

evidence. See Edwards Affidavit, Exhibit "N" at 117. 75. Epstein also takes issue with Edwards identifying Bill Richardson as a possible witness. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Epstein at Epstein's New Mexico Ranch

r Acts of Sexual Assault, filed in Jane Doe v. Epstein, No. 08-cv-80893 (S.D. Fla. 2010), as DE 197, (hereinafter "Rule 413 Notice") (Exhibit "E"); Jane Doe Depo., Attachment #2, at 379-381.1. Depo., Attachment #3, at 416;M. Depo, Attachment #4, at 205. 12. At all relevant times Edwards has had a good basi

to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. See Edwards Affidavit, Exhibit "N" at ¶17. 75. Epstein also takes issue with Edwards identifying Bill Richardson as a possible witness. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Ep

evidence. See Edwards Affidavit, Exhibit "N" at ¶17. 75. Epstein also takes issue with Edwards identifying Bill Richardson as a possible witness. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Epstein at Epstein's New Mexico Ranch

r Acts of Sexual Assault, filed in Jane Doe v. Epstein, No. 08-cv-80893 (S.D. Fla. 2010), as DE 197, (hereinafter "Rule 413 Notice") (Exhibit "E"); Jane Doe Depo., Attachment #2, at 379-380; L.M. Depo., Attachment #3, at 416; E.W. Depo, Attachment #4, at 205. 12. At all relevant times Edwards has had a good

evidence. See Edwards Affidavit, Exhibit "N" at 117. 75. Epstein also takes issue with Edwards identifying Bill Richardson as a possible witness. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Epstein at Epstein's New Mexico Ranch

to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. See Edwards Affidavit, Exhibit "N" at 117. 75. Epstein also takes issue with Edwards identifying Bill Richardson as a possible witness. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Ep

r Acts of Sexual Assault, filed in Jane Doe I. Epstein, No. 08-cv-80893 (S.D. Fla. 2010), as DE 197, (hereinafter "Rule 413 Notice") (Exhibit "E"); Jane Doe Depo., Attachment #2, at 379-380; 5. Depo., Attachment #3, at 416;5. Depo, Attachment #4, at 205. 12. At all relevant times Edwards has had a good fait

King, C.J.) (holding that violation of Florida's criminal extortion statute does not give rise to a civil cause of action for damages); Mantooth v. Richards, 557 So. 2d 646, 646 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal of plaintiff's claim for parental kidnapping where "the mentioned statut

to court [for his state-court guilty plea on June 30], Epstein was served with a copy of a lawsuit by Doe, who has since moved to another state."); Jane Doe Depo. at 77, 112 (indicating that 7 Lewis stein n. 3059 Gum Amax, hart 340, CocomO Gam Flora 33133 7 0 316 EFTA00234230 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Doc

King, C.J.) (holding that violation of Florida's criminal extortion statute does not give rise to a civil cause of action for damages); Mantooth v. Richards, 557 So. 2d 646, 646 (Ha. 4th DCA 1990) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal of plaintiffs claim for parental kidnapping where "the mentioned statutes

his state-court state-court guilty plea on June 30], Epstein was served with a copy of a lawsuit by Doe. who has since moved to another state."); Jane Doe Depo. at 77, 112 (indicating that 7 Lewis 'rein a 30596244444044,Sunt 340, COCOMO Goa.% home. 33233 70316 EFTA00231019 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Docu

King, C.J.) (holding that violation of Florida's criminal extortion statute does not give rise to a civil cause of action for damages); Mantooth v. Richards, 557 So. 2d 646, 646 (Ha. 4th DCA 1990) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal of plaintiffs claim for parental kidnapping where "the mentioned statutes

o cool t gut his state-court guilty plea on June 30], Epstein was served with a copy of a lawsuit by 1)oc, who has since moved to another state."); Jane Doe Depo. at 77, 112 (indicating that 7 Lewitt Teinn. 3059 Gun Mt PM, lulu 340, cmowr GROW. (IOWA 33133 Tog 314 EFTA00232139 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Do