Epstein Secrets

eep True Name in Sealed Envelope filed by Jane Doe, 2 MOTION to Proceed Anonymously filed by Jane Doe. Responses due by 10/15/2008. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 9/30/08. (ir) (Entered: 09/30/2008) 10/01/2008 10. r 459.6 KB MOTION FOR EXTENSTION OF TIME TO RESPOND to I Complaint Extension to Respond to

. https://e,ef.flsd.useourts.gov/egi-bin/DktRpt.p17859999798355213-L_801_0-1 6/10/2009 EFTA00175425 CM/ECE 'Live Database - flsd Page 11 of 12 Marra on 6/1/2009. (1c3) (Entered: 06/01/2009) 06/03/2009 77 r 160.9 KB Defendant's MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 38 Amended Com

ion or "a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v, Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 120 S.Ct. 2037 (2000)• Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (6th Ed.). See also Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the

ses that was not discussed with and approved by all Plaintiffs' attorneys (including Maria Villafana, USAO) at the June 12, 2009 hearing with Judge Marra and as set forth in the transcript (supra); and also found to be appropriate as set forth in this Court's recent order (DE 299) denying Plaintiffs M

ld, 593 F.2d 815 (8th Cir.1979). Importantly, there are no minor Plaintiffs in this matter or the related matters. All are of age. 5. Moroever, I McCormick on Evid., §19 (6th ed.) states, in pertinent part, that: "[f]or two centuries, common law judges and lawyers have regarded the opportunity of cross-

attorneys have no objection to an order to preserve evidence similar to the one entered in the case of Doe v. Epstein, et al, Case No. 08-80804-CIV- MARRA/JOHNSON, [DE 20], and attached hereto as Exhibit A. EPSTEIN's attorneys are unaware of any items referenced in Plaintiffs' motion, 55-6, having been

ion or "a compelled testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 120 S.Ct. 2037 (2000); Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976)• McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (6th Ed.). See also Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964Xthe F

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY

testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence EFTA00222080 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 63 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/25/2009 Page 7 of 37 Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein Page 7

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY

testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (61h Ed.). The privilege against self-incrimination may be asserted d

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON C.M. A., Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEI

testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000); see ado Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (6th Ed.). The privilege against self-incrimination may be asserted d

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY

testimonial aspect." United States v. Hubbell 530 U.S. 27, 36, 120 S.Ct. 2037, 2043 (2000); see also Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (61h Ed.). The privilege against self-incrimination may be asserted d