Epstein Secrets

ions are not privileged from discovery, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND 2 EFTA00209386 Case: 13-12923 Date F(IIdt H4118/2014 Page: 3 of 23 In 2006, the Federal Bureau of Investigation began investigating allegations that Jeffrey Epstein had sexually abused several minor girls. The United States Attorney's Office for the Southern

, but we decline to draw an arbitrary line. The victims' argument has an ipse dixit quality—that is, because our Court has never before applied the Penman doctrine outside of the grand jury context, we should not do so now. But we must ask instead whether applying the doctrine here makes sense. 11 E

ions are not privileged from discovery, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND 2 EFTA00209427 Case: 13-12923 Date F(IIdt H4118/2014 Page: 3 of 23 In 2006, the Federal Bureau of Investigation began investigating allegations that Jeffrey Epstein had sexually abused several minor girls. The United States Attorney's Office for the Southern

, but we decline to draw an arbitrary line. The victims' argument has an ipse dixit quality—that is, because our Court has never before applied the Penman doctrine outside of the grand jury context, we should not do so now. But we must ask instead whether applying the doctrine here makes sense. 11 E

ions are not privileged from discovery, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND 2 EFTA00209742 Case: 13-12923 Date Filed: 04/18/2014 Page: 3 of 23 In 2006, the Federal Bureau of Investigation began investigating allegations that Jeffrey Epstein had sexually abused several minor girls. The United States Attorney's Office for the Southern

, but we decline to draw an arbitrary line. The victims' argument has an ipse dixit quality—that is, because our Court has never before applied the Penman doctrine outside of the grand jury context, we should not do so now. But we must ask instead whether applying the doctrine here makes sense. 11 E