Epstein Secrets

To: Bcc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Gregory Brown undisclosed-recipients:; [email protected]

u can't kill me." Provenzano spent more than 15 years on death row sleeping under his cot with a box on his head because he was hearing voices. But the Florida Supreme Court sided with Waldman, and Provenzano was executed in June 2000. As for Panetti, he remains on death row, growing increasingly paranoid and delusional

24 F.3d 65, 76-77 (1" Cir. 2005); United States' Brown, 43 F.3d 618, 625 (11`h Cir. 1995). The governmen

by any other object; or the handling or fondling of the sexual organ of another for the purpose of masturbation." Fla. Stat. § 796.01(1)(d). Also, the Florida Supreme Court jury instructions define prostitution as involving "sexual intercourse." As a result, topless massages—even ones for hire that include self masturb

f an opportunity to engage in prohibited conduct. See, e.g,. United States v. Sanchez-Berrios, 424 F.3d 65, 76-77 (ls' Cir. 2005); United States v. Brown, 43 F.3d 618, 625 (11th Cir. 1995). The government cannot fairly, or consistent with the rule of lenity, advocate a broader definition of the same t

r by any other object; or the handling or fondling of the sexual organ of another for the purpose of masturbation." Fla. Stat. § 796.01(1Xd). Also, the Florida Supreme Court jury instructions define prostitution as involving "sexual intercourse." As a result, topless massages—even ones for hire that include self- masturb

of an opportunity to engage in prohibited conduct. See, e.g,. United States v. Sanchez-Berrios, 424 F.3d 65, 76-77 (1" Cir. 2005); United States v. Brown, 43 F.3d 618, 625 (I1th Cu. 1995). The government cannot fairly, or consistent with the rule of lenity, advocate a broader definition of the same te

r by any other object; or the handling or fondling of the sexual organ of another for the purpose of masturbation." Fla. Stat. § 796.01(1Xd). Also, the Florida Supreme Court jury instructions define prostitution as involving "sexual intercourse." As a result, topless massages—even ones for hire that include self masturb

ustice. A witness before the grand jury has no privilege of having his testimony there treated as a confidential communication.... State ex rel. Brown v. Dewell, 167 So. 687, 690 (F1a.1936). Florida case law directly construing section 905.27 fails to provide a contrary interpretation of the r

ants is without a basis in Florida law. We fmd no evidence that the Florida courts derive an evidentiary privilege from Fla.Stat. 905.27. Indeed, the Florida Supreme Court has noted that [t]he rule of secrecy concerning matters transpiring in the grand jury room is not designed for the protection of witnesses bef

ustice. A witness before the grand jury has no privilege of having his testimony there treated as a confidential communication.... State ex rel. Brown v. Dewell, 167 So. 687, 690 (Fla.1936). Florida case law directly construing section 905.27 fails to provide a contrary interpretation of the re

ts is without a basis in Florida law. We fmd no evidence that the Florida courts derive an evidentiary privilege from Fla.Stat. § 905.27. Indeed, the Florida Supreme Court has noted that [t]he rule of secrecy concerning matters transpiring in the grand jury room is not designed for the protection of witnesses bef

y v. Colby, 976 So. 2d 31 (Ha. 2d DCA 2008) 10 Brown Distributing Co. of West Palm Beach v. Marcel, 86

Ha. Const.). 09112/2019 dae 3572 CONFIDENTIAL Agency to Agency Requet: 19-011 SDNY_GM_00331 835 EFTA 00204561 EFTA02729546 For this reason, the Florida Supreme Court has established a Rule of Judicial Administration setting forth a general rule that the "public shall have access to all records of the judicial br

justice. A witness before the grand jury has no privilege of having his testimony there treated as a confidential communication.... Stare a rel. Brown v. Dave11, 167 So. 687, 690 (Fla.1936). Florida case law directly construing section 905.27 fails to provide a contrary interpretation of the re

s is without a basis in Florida law. We find no evidence that the Florida courts derive an evidentiary privilege from Fla.Stat. § 905.27. Indeed, the Florida Supreme Court has noted that It)he rule of secrecy concerning matters transpiring in the grand jury room is not designed for the protection of witnesses b

justice. A witness before the grand jury has no privilege of having his testimony there treated as a confidential communication.... Stare a rel. Brown v. Dewell, 167 So. 637, 690 (Fla.1936). Florida case law directly construing section 905.27 fails to provide a contrary interpretation of the rel

s is without a basis in Florida law. We find no evidence that the Florida courts derive an evidentiary privilege from F1a.Stat. § 905.27. Indeed, the Florida Supreme Court has noted that [t]he rule of secrecy concerning matters transpiring in the grand jury room is not designed for the protection of witnesses b

ustice. A witness before the grand jury has no privilege of having his testimony there treated as a confidential communication.... State ex rel. Brown v. Delvell, 167 So. 687, 690 (Fla.1936). Florida case law directly construing section 905.27 fails to provide a contrary interpretation of th

nts is without a basis in Florida law. We find no evidence that the Florida courts derive an evidentiary privilege from Fla.Stat. 905.27. Indeed, the Florida Supreme Court has noted that Mlle rule of secrecy concerning matters transpiring in the grand jury room is not designed for the protection of witnesses bef