Epstein Secrets

Airtime Toil Charges Charges Total 6/30/05 Marra, FL 11:21 AM (F) 1 $ - $ S 830/05 Marion,

09104 New Yerk, NY 1:24 PM (F) 1 $ 9/09,04 New Yak NY 3:24 PM 1 $ 9/09/04 Miami, FL 10:49 PM 1 $ 9/09/04 Incoming 10:50 PM 14 9.09/04 Miarra, FL 11:22 PM 1 $ Cal Type: (A) Cal %Nairn.; (3) Cat Forward (C) Corderence Cal (E) DataFax (F) MCIA42/.14000 (0) Volterra% 00 Free Calls (k) IMP

otal of All Usage Charges S 1.98 ...••,•••••••••••• • Ca Typec (A) Cal WasIng (8) Cal Forward (C) Conference CM (E) Data/Fax (F) MobardMobile (0) Wagner (H) Free Calls (H)WPS Cat • •• • •••• ••• • • ••• II. • • . . EFTA01719443 Eternized DetaIs For: Account Number: Customer Service Number

ecutors to turn over documents about plea discussions with Epstein. The decision also lifted an appellate stay on the ruling by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra in West Palm Beach to allow the release of documents to the women, identified in court papers only as Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2. The women

erly Martin and U.S. District Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell of Orlando, sitting by designation. The U.S. attorneys office in Miami argued before Marra that the victims did not need to be notified of the agreement because the women's liberty was not at stake. It also took the position that the Crim

settlement agreement materials may sometimes be discoverable, see, e.g., In re MSTG, Inc., 675 F.3d 1337, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2012),' they are But see Wagner'. Wash{/)`, Case No. 2:08-cv-431 (S.D. Ohio May 14, 2013), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68349 (denying motion to compel discovery of settlement agreement o

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs,

lement agreement at trial under Fed. R. Evid. 403).3 And because plea negotiations, "if publicly released, could be damaging to reputation and 'See Wagner v. Wastiffs, Case No. 2:08-cv-431 (S.D. Ohio May 14, 2013), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68349 (denying motion to compel discovery of settlement agreement

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs,

lement agreement at trial under Fed. R. Evid. 403).3 And because plea negotiations, "if publicly released, could be damaging to reputation and 3See Wagner" Wastiffs, Case No. 2:08-cv-431 (S.D. Ohio May 14, 2013), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68349 (denying motion to compel discovery of settlement agreement on

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs

ettlement agreement materials may sometimes be discoverable, see, e.g., In re MSTG, Inc., 675 F.3d 1337, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2012),' they are ' But see Wagner v. Waal*, Case No. 2:08-cv-431 (S.D. Ohio May 14, 2013), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68349 (denying motion to compel discovery of settlement agreement on