Epstein Secrets

Infliction of Emotional Distress," such claims are subject to the constitutional limitations and guideposts as set forth in BMW of North America v. Gore, 116 S.Ct 1589 (1996); Philip Morris USA v. Williams, 127 S.Ct. 1057 (2007); State Farm v. Campbell, 123 S.Ct 1513 (2003); Engle v. Liqoet Group, In

ant Jeffrey Epstein Date Filed: 05/01/2009 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 360 P.I.: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question represented by Katherine Warthen Ezell Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg et al City National Bank Building 25 W Flagler Street Suite 800 Miami FL 33130-1780 Fax: Email: LEAD ATTORNEY ATT

filed by Jane Doe No. 101.(Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 05/01/2009) 05/01/2009 8 r 173 KB RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Jane Doe No. 101. (Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 05/01/2009) 05/01/2009 9 ri 61.2 KB First AMENDED COMPLAINT and Demand For Jury Trial, filed by Jane Doe No. 101.(Ezell

e 6 of 7 Jane Doe No. 102's Motion for a No-Contact Order filed by Jane Doe No. 101, Jane Doe No. 102. Associated Cases: 9:08-cv-80119-KAM et al. (Ezell, Katherine) (Entered: 06/04/2009) 06/04/2009 28 ORDER STRIKING (112 in 9:08-cv-80381-ICAM, 111 in 9:08-cv-80232- KAM, 136 in 9:08-cv-80119-KAM, 11

ublic record, I was aware that, you know, probably the most significant United States Supreme Court case argued in the last 20 years was Bush versus Gore, which was a case that essentially determined who was going to be President of the most powerful country in the world. There were two attorneys who

d. There were two attorneys who argued that case in front of the United States Supreme Court, and arguing for the Democratic Presidential Candidate, Al Gore, was David Boies. He had put his credibility on the line in arguing the Bush versus Gore case, and without ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS (954) 331-4

A: Q. Do you recall the following testimony having been given in that same deposition? "Question: Allright. This is follow-up to questioning by Ms. Ezell. Ms. Ezell asked you about Mr. Dershowitz being present in Mr. Epstein's home, and I think you said -- I think you said Mr. Epstein and he and Mr. De

Infliction of Emotional Distress," such claims are subject to the constitutional limitations and guideposts as set forth in BMW of North America v. Gore, 116 S.Ct 1589 (1996)• Philip Morris USA v. Williams, 127 S.Ct. 1057 (2007)• State Farm v. Campbell, 123 S.Ct 1513 (2003); Engle v. Ligget Group, In

Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 Counsel for Plaintiff, Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08- 80469 Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Hagler Street, Suite 800 130 EFTA00182754 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 152 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/1

e with former vice president Gore and his then wife, Tipper, providing specific details purportedly to enhance the value of her fictional story: “The Gores seemed like a beautiful couple when I met them... Jeffrey [Epstein] didn’t ask me to give him a massage... I was planning on voting for him when I tu

ing on the same island, but this time with former vice president Gore and his then wife, Tipper, providing specific det

-80736-KAM Document 306 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2015 Page 11 of 19 that evidence will show that former president Clinton, former vice president Al Gore, and Tipper Gore never set foot on Epstein’s private island, and that in all events Jane Doe #3’s detailed accounts are not merely preposterous on th

be a correct statement that you have absolutely no knowledge? A. I don’t know, sir. Q. Okay. Were you in any way attempting in your response to Ms. Ezell to imply that Mr. Dershowitz had a massage by one of these young ladies? A. I don’t know, sir. Q. You have no knowledge? A. No, sir. (Rodriguez De