Epstein Secrets

om Michael James Pike [email protected] Paul G. Cassell [email protected] Richard Horace Willit

ichael James Pike [email protected] Paul G. Cassell [email protected] Richard Horace Willit

Fla. 2008) (citing cases relying upon Maddow v. Procter & Gamble Co., 107 F.3d 846 (11th Cir. 1997), in rejecting a h

llsouth.net Jack Patrick Hill [email protected] Katherine Warthen Ezell [email protected] Michael James Pike [email protected] Paul G. Cassell [email protected] Richard Horace Willits [email protected] Robert C. Josefsberg [email protected] Case 9:08

ichael James Pike [email protected] Paul G. Cassell [email protected] Richard Horace Willit

formation may be obtained by a party in discovery.” Bellosa v. Universal Tile Restoration, Inc., 2008 WL 2620735 (S.D. Fla. 2008) (citing Maddow v. Procter & Gamble Co., 107 F.3d 846 (11th Cir. 1997)); accord U.S. v. Certain Real Property, 444 F.Supp. 2d 1258 (S.D.Fla. 2006); Platypus Wear, Inc. v. Clarke Modet & C

om Michael James Pike [email protected] Paul G. Cassell [email protected] Richard Horace Willit

ichael James Pike [email protected] Paul G. Cassell [email protected] Richard Horace Willit

08 WL 2620735 (S.D. Fla. 2008) (citing Maddow v. Procter & Gamble Co., 107 F.3d 846 (11th Cir. 1997)); accord U.S. v.

ecution.' " Id. at 22. Thus, she says, our interpretation impermissibly renders the terms "detection" and "investigation" meaningless. Id.; see also Paul G. Cassell et al., Crime Victims' Rights During Criminal Investigations? Applying the Crime Victims' Rights Act Before Criminal Charges Are Filed, 104 J. Crim

9:08-cv-80736-KAM Attorneys and Law Firms Paul Cassell, University of Utah College of Law, SALT LAKE CT

iscovery of information from the investigation that is relevant to the CVRA claim— specifically the issue of probable cause. See,e.g.,Farnsworth v. Procter & Gamble Co., 758 F.2d 1545, 1546 (11th Cir. 1985) ("The law's basic presumption is that the public is entitled to every person's evidence. The Federal Rules o

ed. aOnly Jane Doe #1 and her counsel elected to attend a meeting with the U.S. Attorney. L2The U.S. Attorney's Office also repeatedly reminded Mr. Cassell, a former federal judge and Justice Department official, of the Justice Department's policy not to comment on the guilt or innocence of an unconvic

they have reason to believe certain indictments will issue. United States I Eisenberg , 711 F.2d 959, 961 (11th Cir. 1983) (citing United States I Procter & Gamble Co. , 356 U.S. 677, 681 n.6 (1958)). Several of the "facts" contained in Petitioners' submission contain allegations related to matters occurring befo

epted should be denied. aOnly Jane Doe #1 and her counsel elected to attend this meeting. L2The U.S. Attorney's Office also repeatedly reminded Mr. Cassell, a former federal judge and Justice Department official, of the Justice Department's policy not to comment on the guilt or innocence of an unconvic

hey 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 in Petitioners' submission contain allegations related to matters occurring befo