Epstein Secrets

axwell's counsel and press agent. We are going to have jury instructions about what the Crime Victims' Rights Act means, we're going to have Judge Marra's order explaining why did someone wait six years and put in all these allegations about nonparties like Ms. Maxwell, Mr. Dershowitz, and striking

e Victims' Rights Act means, we're going to have Judge Marra's order explaining why did someone wait six year

22 23 24 25 problem. Well, no, it isn't. No, it isn't. Okay. So let's do 675. MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, I will say that it is my reading of Rule 412 that any hearing that is based upon in part Rule 412 is supposed to be conducted in a in camera setting. MS. SCHULTZ: Counsel for Ms. has no objec

RN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CIV- 80893 - MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTE

both friends of Jane Doe and. brought Jane Doe to Epstein's house for the first time. 48. Epstein does not intend to offer any evidence covered by Rule 412, Federal Rules of Evidence, regarding or 'Sexual behavior or predisposition. Epstein contends that In and ■ should be prohibited from testifying

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFRE

9-KAM Document 266 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2009 Page 7 of 9 history, thereby evading the limitations on discovery and admissibility found in Rule 412 for the only conceivable purpose of harassing the Plaintiff. Defendant asserts that he seeks to use investigators to ask ex-boyfriends and friends

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

conduct or predisposition in civil cases, which will be continued to be governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. In order not to undermine the rationale of Rule 412, however, courts should enter appropriate orders pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 (c) to protect the victim against unwarranted inquiries and to ensu

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

conduct or predisposition in civil cases, which will be continued to be governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. In order not to undermine the rationale of Rule 412, however, courts should enter appropriate orders pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 (c) to protect the victim against unwarranted inquiries and to ensu

F FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defen

urt "must impose certain restriction on discovery to preclude inquiry into areas which will clearly fail to satisfy the balancing test" set forth in Rule 412. See Barta I. City and County of Honolulu, 169 F.R.D. at 135. In Barta, the Court confronted this issue in the context of a discovery motion in a c

FFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON CAS

l conduct or predisposition in civil cases, which will be continued to be governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. In order not to undermine the rationale of Rule 412, however, courts should enter appropriate orders pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 (c) to protect the victim against unwarranted inquiries and to ensu