Epstein Secrets

NEY TO BE NOTICED The Garcia Law Firm. P.A. The Harvey Building 224 Datura Street Suite 900 West Palm B

ey Epstein Joint Notice of Withdrawal as to Jane Does 2-8 (Pike, Michael) (Entered: 06/11/2010) 562 NOTICE by Jane Doe of Withdrawal of Subpoenas (Mermelstein. Stuart) (Entered: 06/11/2010) 563 NOTICE by Jane Doe of Withdrawal of Subpoena (Arbour, Jessica) (Entered: 06/14/2010) 564 ORDER withdrawing 48

57 Plaintiff's MOTION to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Production of Documents, and Incorporated Memorandum of Law in Support by Jane Doe. (Mermelstein, Stuart) (Entered: 04/20/2009) RESPONSE in Opposition re 65 Defendant% MOTION to Stay re 56 Amended Complaint filed by Jane Doe. (Mermelstein, Stua

08/13/2009) 266 REPLY to Response to Motion re 226 Plaintiff's MOTION for Protective Order and Incorporated Memorandum of Law filed by Jane Doe. (Mermelstein. Stuart) (Entered: 08/14/2009) 267 NOTICE by Jane Doe of Filing Declarations of Jane Doe No. 4 and Y.B. in Further Support of Plaintiffs' Jane Do

ose of the rules is to encourage plea bargaining, and rules "creat[e], in effect, a privilege of the defendant," quoting 2 J. Weinstein & M. Berger, Weinstein's Evidence 1410[05] at 410-43 (1994)); United States v. Barrow, 400 F.3d 109, 116 (2d Cir. 2005X"The underlying purpose of Rule 410 is to promote p

heir civil case, but to gain information to aid in the future prosecution of Epstein in direct violation of his Fifth Amendment rights. In fact, the Mermelstein and Horowitz firm was quoted in the Palm Beach Post stating, among other things, that the book sold to undercover agents could open the door to fut

ose of the rules is to encourage plea bargaining, and rules "creat[e], in effect, a privilege of the defendant," quoting 2 J. Weinstein & M. Berger, Weinstein's Evidence if410[05] at 410-43 (1994)); United States v. Barrow, 400 F.3d 109, 116 (2d Cir. 2005)("The underlying purpose of Rule 410 is to promote

heir civil case, but to gain information to aid in the future prosecution of Epstein in direct violation of his Fifth Amendment rights. In fact, the Mermelstein and Horowitz firm was quoted in the Palm Beach Post stating, among other things, that the book sold to undercover agents could open the door to fut

and 1591. He also complained about Mr. Epstein's lawyers and told Mr. Thomas not to "believe the spin from Mr. Epstein's high priced attorneys? Mr. Weinstein even informed Mr. Thomas that we had "asked for privately paid armed guards" as part of a house arrest proposal we had made. Even more surprising, h

amed partner in Mr. I ferman's firm. See Tab 31, Florida Bar Website page. 39. Mr. Herman, who is the named partner in the former firm of Herman, Mermelstein, filed five lawsuits, each asking for S50 million, against Mr. Epstein. Each lawsuit is entitled "Jane Doc # vs. Jeffrey Epstein," despite the fact

med partner in Mr. Herman’s firm. See Tab 31, Florida Bar Website page. Mr. Herman, who is the named pariner in the former firm of Herman, Sloman, & Mermelstein, filed five lawsuits, each asking for $50 million, against Mr. Epstein. Each lawsuit is entitled “Jane Doe # vs. Jeffrey Epstein,” despite the fact t

the case and the plea negotiations. Mr. Thomas’s calls to the USAO initially were referred to Assistant United States Attorney David Weinstein. AUSA Weinstein informed Mr. Thomas that federal authorities were considering charging Mr. Epstein under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591, 2422 and 2423, and told the reporter that