Epstein Secrets

101 H3v1giu2 1 MR. CASSELL: All right. Well, we thought, when we 2 filed our response, they continued to oppose it. If they had 3 just stipulated, you know, I wouldn't be t

d actual 2 prior knowledge of the issues, of the at-issue statements that 3 were offered by the defendant. Again, the statements were made 4 to Crescenz. 5 And then the last case is a 1983 case, Tierney v. 6 Davidson. That involved civil rights violations and objective 7 reasonableness by the of

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 H3v1giu2 101 MR. CASSELL: All right. Well, we thought, when we filed our response, they continued to oppose it. If they had just stipulated, you know, I wouldn't be taking

d actual 2 prior knowledge of the issues, of the at-issue statements that 3 were offered by the defendant. Again, the statements were made 4 to Crescenz. 5 And then the last case is a 1983 case, Tierney v. 6 Davidson. That involved civil rights violations and objective 7 reasonableness by the of

10 id. 12 13 14 L5 16 ne) 18 life) 20 21 22 23 24 25 101 H3vlgiu2 r MR. CASSELL: All right. Well, we thought, when we filed our response, they continued to oppose it. If they had just stipulated, you know, I wouldn't be taking y

efendant had actual prior knowledge of the issues, of the at-issue statements that were offered by the defendant. Again, the statements were mad to Crescenz. And then the last case is a 1983 case, Tierney v. Davidson. That involved civil rights violations and objective reasonableness by the officers who