Epstein Secrets

statements. their, credibility and the foundations. if any. fir claiming personal injury. Also. Mr. Epstein would have received, pursuant to either Brady or Jencks. material in tlx: form of prior inconsistent statements made by these women before they learned of any financial benefit that may be avai

s the VNS Internet site, you will be prompted to enter your lest name (or business name) es currently contained in VNS. The name you should enter is Eisenberg. EFTA00184950 atse.9:613:cv:£30736-KAM ment 362-28 Entered on FLSD *ket 02/10/2016 Page 3 of 3 DOI ODU 0,31 M.U3/0e “ ; If you MVO additiona

8 U.S. Department of Justice Federal.Bureau of Investigation FBI - West Palm Beach Suite 500 505 South Flagler Drive West Palm Beach. FL 33401 James Eisenberg Ono Cleadako Center Ste 704 Australian South West Palm Beach. Ft. 33401 Re: Dear James Eisenberg: You have requested to receive notifications fo

npersuaded by the letter and the presentation, but I agreed that I should carefully review transcripts of the recorded statements given to PBPD for Brady issues.15 Since witness credibility was clearly at the fore, I undertook efforts 14 The requested documents and items were never provided. 15 As th

her in touch with his attorney, Jack Goldberger; and Goldberger had his friend, Jim Eisenberg, serve as Individual #28's lawyer while Epstein paid Eisenberg's fees. Individual #28 later told Brad Edwards that someone (Epstein, Goldberger, or Eisenberg) told her that "the government" planned to take away

mann v. Fla. Dep't of Colt, 940 F.3d 559, 580 (11th Cir. 2019) ("Although we conclude that the district court properly determined that Riechmann's Brady claim was procedurally defaulted, we will briefly address the substance of the underlying Brady claim, which we alternatively find lacks merit.");

stigative and prosecutorial arm of the executive branch of government." (quotation marks omitted)). Further, as we explained in ?a United States v. Eisenberg, "[u]ntil an indictment is returned and a case presented to the United States District Court, the responsibility for the functioning of the grand

e attorneys representing criminals, the Office would promptly turn over all information in its possession that was helpful to these criminals under Brady' Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and related decisions. Victims' counsel asked the Office to extend to the victims the same assistance that it would p

the investigation if the facts arc known or might attempt to escape if they have reason to believe certain indictments will issue. United States v. Eisenberg, 711 F.2d 959, 961 (11th Cir. 1983) (citing United States v. Procter & Gamble Co., 356 U.S. 677, 681 n.6 (1958)). Several of the "facts" contained

e attorneys representing criminals, the Office would promptly turn over all information in its possession that was helpful to these criminals under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and related decisions. Victims' counsel asked the Office to extend to the victims the same assistance that it would

the investigation if the facts are known or might attempt to escape if they have reason to believe certain indictments will issue. United States v. Eisenberg, 711 F.2d 959, 961 (11th Cir. 1983) (citing United States v. Procter & Gamble Co., 356 U.S. 677, 681 n.6 (1958)). Several of the "facts" contained

e attorneys representing criminals, the Office would promptly turn over all information in its possession that was helpful to these criminals under Brady. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and related decisions. Victims' counsel asked the Office to extend to the victims the same assistance that it would p

the investigation if the facts are known or might attempt to escape if they have reason to believe certain indictments will issue. United States. Eisenberg, 711 F.2d 959, 961 (11th Cir. 1983) (citing United States. Procter & Gamble Co., 356 U.S. 677, 681 n.6 (1958)). Several of the "facts" contained in

npersuaded by the letter and the presentation, but I agreed that I should carefully review transcripts of the recorded statements given to PBPD for Brady issues." Since witness credibility was clearly at the fore, I undertook efforts " The requested documents and items were never provided. 15 As the

Menchel with attached letter containing counter- proposal for plea to two years of 'supenised custody.' 9 8/24/2006- 10/24/2006 Entails betweenJim Eisenberg and Marie Villafana regarding #28 10 10/30/2006- 10/31-2006 Emails between Marie Vitt:liana and Guy Lewis regarding Lewis respresentation of Eps

de v. McLaughlin, 500 U.S. 44, 52-58 (1991) (defining "prompt" under Gerstein's requirement of a prompt judicial determination of probable cause). 6 Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 86 (1963) (holding prosecution's withholding of the confession of defendant's confederate violated defendant's due process

lack Jacket): A Critique on the Lack of Prosecution of Hunting "Accidents," 56.S.C. L. Rev. 135, 166-73 (2004). © See id.; Duane, supra note 48. 5! Eisenberg, supra note 45, at 893-96 (discussing data from prosecutor interviews). In the contexts Eisenberg describes, prosecutors typically forgo hate-crime o