Epstein Secrets

Related Case No. 08-80811 [email protected] Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Hill, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola

ted Case No. 08-80811 [email protected] Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Hill, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola

nd September 9, 2009 Omnibus Order (DE 293); and Manson v. United States, 244 U.S. 362, 365 (1917). More

Related Case No. 08- 80811 [email protected] Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Hill, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola

ted Case No. 08- 80811 [email protected] Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Hill, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola

and September 9, 2009 Omnibus Order (DE 293); and Manson v. United States, 244 U.S. 362,365 (1917). More

Related Case No. 08-80811 [email protected] Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Hill, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola

ted Case No. 08-80811 [email protected] Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Hill, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola

nto play only in those instances where the witness has "reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer." Hoffman 341 U.S. at 486 (citing Manson v. United States, 244 U.S. 362,365 (1917)). "The claimant must be 'confronted by substantial and 'real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, haza