Epstein Secrets

ing to L.M. and E.W. were not produced because of some tangential privilege based on the pending Crimes Victims' Rights Act ("CVRA") action against the United States Government, this lacks merit. None of the subject e-mails are communications between the government and Edwards' clients or their counsel or implicate any iss

ivilege log that this Court's predecessor, The Honorable David Crow, found to be insufficient on its face and not-compliant with the requirements of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(5)7 and TIG Ins. Corp. v. Johnson, 799 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Edwards has claimed that none of the documents on the dis

sealing such documents. After hearing argument of counsel, the Court makes the following findings and rulings: 1) Neither the State of Florida nor the U.S. Government nor Mr. Epstein have presented sufficient evidence to warrant the sealing of documents currently held by the Court. 2) The Motions to_seal the

EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E, Defendant. MOTION TO INTERVENE AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW COMES NOW, Applicant, M. and requests this Court, pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.230, for leave to intervene as a party in Mr. Epstein's criminal matter for the following reasons: 1. Applicant's intervention is in

ealing such documents. After hearing argument of counsel, the Court makes the following findings and rulings: 1) Neither the State of Florida nor the U.S. Government nor Mr. Epstein have presented sufficient evidence to warrant the sealing of documents currently held by the Court. 2) The Motions taseal thet

EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E, Defendant. MOTION TO INTERVENE AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW COMES NOW, Applicant, ■. and requests this Court, pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.230, for leave to intervene as a party in Mr. Epstein's criminal matter for the following reasons: 1. Applicant's intervention is in