Epstein Secrets

ay not trample upon the rights of others and then escape the consequences by invoking a constitutional privilege — at least not in a civil setting." Fraser v. Security and Inv. Corp., 615 So.2d 841, 842 (Fla. App. 1993). EFTA00081182 Case 9:08.cv_807agg3498mot 2rKali564rgerNeocp0F4lapiyocisstggy aig1

#16); See 20 EFTA00081201 Case 9:08-cv-8078gn3asiw 2a-c1.?60Verv iiecilif 4qp iRocistal..21c/M5 Page 23 of deposition of Epstein's housekeeper Louella Rabuyo, October 20, 2009, page 9, lines 17-25 (Deposition Attachment #I7); See deposition of Epstein's pilot Larry Eugene Morrison, October 6, 2009, page

3 of deposition of Epstein's housekeeper Louella Rabuyo, October 20, 2009, page 9, lines 17-25 (Depositi

ment #16) See deposition of Epstein's housekeeper Louella Rabuyo, October 20, 2009, page 9, lines 17.25 (Depositio

may not trample upon the rights of others and then escape the consequences by invoking a constitutional privilege — at least not in a civil setting.” Fraser v. Security and INV. Corp, 615 So. 2d. 841, 842 (Fla. 4" DCA 1993). The adverse inferences drawn from Epstein’s assertion of the Fifth Amendment unde

girls for him to abuse), Larry Visoski (Epstein’s personal pilot), Dave Rogers (Epstein’s personal pilot), Larry Harrison (Epstein’s personal pilot), Louella Rabuyo (Epstein’s housekeeper), Nadia Marcinkova (Epstein’s live-in sex slave), Ghislaine Maxwell (manager of Epstein’s affairs and businesses), Mark

ent #16); See deposition of Epstein's housekeeper Louella Rabuyo, October 20, 2009, page 9, lines 17-25 (Depositio

may not trample upon the rights of others and then escape the consequences by invoking a constitutional privilege — at least not in a civil setting.” Fraser v. Security and Inv. Corp., 615 So.2d 841, 842 (Fla. App. 1993). 2 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010567 --- PAGE BREAK --- using a vibrator and he also paid he