Epstein Secrets

g in US v. Epstein. I learned of your role in theaase by reading your affidavit, dated June 7, 2019, which includes your legal ethics opinion that David Boies should be disqualified from representing Ms. in that matter. As you are aware, both Mr. Boles and Ms. were invited to testify at the August 27, 20

UDGE Bruce A. Green Louis Stein Chair Fordharn University School of Law 150 West 62"d Street Room 7-168 New York City, NY 10023 Dear Professor Green, USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC It: DATE FILED: I September 4, 2019 Thank you for your letter of August 30, 2019. I appreciate yo

ument 56 Filed 09/04/19 Page 2 of 2 Finally, it is unfortunate that your opinion piece may have been construed as an effort to chill Ms. a and Mr. Boies' right to be heard under 18 U.S.C. § 3771 at the August 27, 2019 public hearing. You wrote: "[W]hatever informational interests the victims may have

of the District Court of Utah, I believe, and it's a pleasure to have you here today. MR. CASSELL: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Thanks. Mr. Boies? MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor. David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner. We have with us today five of the victims that we represent. There are a

, and it's a pleasure to have you here today. MR. CASSELL: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Thanks. Mr. Boies? MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor. David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner. We have with us today five of the victims that we represent. There are a number of additional victims who either were u

ink that is exactly what the law requires and intends. I will be more blunt than the Court has been, or Professor Cassell has been about Professor Green's article. That is an article that cites no authority, and I believe there is no authority for his proposition. I entirely respect his right to ad

of the District Court of Utah, I believe, and it's a pleasure to have you here today. MR. CASSELL: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Thanks. Mr. Boies? MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor. David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner. We have with us today five of the victims that we represent. There are a

, and it's a pleasure to have you here today. MR. CASSELL: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Thanks. Mr. Boies? MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor. David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner. We have with us today five of the victims that we represent. There are a number of additional victims who either were u

ink that is exactly what the law requires and intends. I will be more blunt than the Court has been, or Professor Cassell has been about Professor Green's article. That is an article that cites no authority, and I believe there is no authority for his proposition. I entirely respect his right to ad

. The Epstein scandal, from its very beginnings, has always been as much about the role of money in our very unequal society as it is about sex. As David Boies, a lawyer who represents several of the women who say they were victimized by Epstein and Maxwell (including Annie Farmer, who gave a brief stateme

ery unequal society as it is about sex. As David Boies, a lawyer who represents several of the women who

ty business." The SFist (7/15, Barmann) also reports. Minnesota Couple Pleads Guilty In Virginia To Fraud. The Richmond (VA) Times-Dispatch (7/15, Green, 277K) reports, "A Minnesota couple pleaded guilty Wednesday in federal court in Richmond to charges of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud in

of the District Court of Utah, I believe, and it's a pleasure to have you here today. MR. CASSELL: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Thanks. Mr. Boies? MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor. David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner. We have with us today five of the victims that we represent. There are a

, and it's a pleasure to have you here today. MR. CASSELL: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Thanks. Mr. Boies? MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor. David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner. We have with us today five of the victims that we represent. There are a number of additional victims who either were u

ink that is exactly what the law requires and intends. I will be more blunt than the Court has been, or Professor Cassell has been about Professor Green's article. That is an article that cites no authority, and I believe there is no authority for his proposition. I entirely respect his right to ad

of the District Court of Utah, I believe, and it's a pleasure to have you here today. MR. CASSELL: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Thanks. Mr. Boies? MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor. David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner. We have with us today five of the victims that we represent. There are a

, and it's a pleasure to have you here today. MR. CASSELL: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Thanks. Mr. Boies? MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor. David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner. We have with us today five of the victims that we represent. There are a number of additional victims who either were u

ink that is exactly what the law requires and intends. I will be more blunt than the Court has been, or Professor Cassell has been about Professor Green's article. That is an article that cites no authority, and I believe there is no authority for his proposition. I entirely respect his right to ad

in US v. Epstein. I learned of your role in theme case by reading your affidavit, dated June 7, 2019, which includes your legal ethics opinion that David Boies should be di ualified from representing Ms. in that matter. As you are aware, both Mr. Boles and Ms. were invited to testify at the August 27, 201

ument 56 Filed 09/04/19 Page 2 of 2 Finally, it is unfortunate that your opinion piece may have been construed as an effort to chill Ms. a and Mr. Boies' right to be heard under 18 U.S.C. § 3771 at the August 27, 2019 public hearing. You wrote: "[W]hatever informational interests the victims may have

UDGE Bruce A. Green Louis Stein Chair Fordharn University School of Law 150 West 62"d Street Room 7-168 New York City, NY 10023 Dear Professor Green, USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC it: DA.TS SLED: i September 4, 2019 Thank you for your letter of August 30, 2019.1 appreciate yo

in US v. Epstein. I learned of your role in the case by reading your affidavit, dated June 7, 2019, which includes your legal ethics opinion that David Boies should be disqualified from representing- in that matter. As you are aware, both Mr. Boles and were invited to testify at the August 27, 2019 heari

MB Document 56 Filed 09/04/19 Page 2 of 2 Finally, it is unfortunate that your opinion piece may have been construed as an effort to chill-and Mr. Boies' right to be heard under 18 U.S.C. § 3771 at the August 27, 2019 public hearing. You wrote: "[W]hatever informational interests the victims may have

M. BERMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Bruce A. Green Louis Stein Chair Fordham University School of Law New York City, NY 10023 Dear Professor Green, USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC DATE FILED: 41 411 September 4, 2019 Thank you for your letter of August 30, 2019. I appreciate

erly of the District Court of Utah, I believe, and it's a pleasure to have you here today. MR. CASSELL: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Thanks. Mr. Boies? MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor. David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner. We have with us today five of the victims that we represent. There are a nu

ieve, and it's a pleasure to have you here today. MR. CASSELL: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Thanks. Mr. Boies? MR. BOIES: Thank you, your Honor. David Boies of Boies Schiller Flexner. We have with us today five of the victims that we represent. There are a number of additional victims who either were unab

think that is exactly what the law requires and intends. I will be more blunt than the Court has been, or Professor Cassell has been about Professor Green's article. That is an article that cites no authority, and I believe there is no authority for his proposition. I entirely respect his right to advoc

- Milt - /O qt*,1 - .2 55 EFTA01699640 • • BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP Letter to Federal Bur

none of the testimony he provided to the Grand Jury was disclosable under the law; and b) any disclosure of said testimony was a crime." Appellant Green's motion stated that "[the] state grand jury proceedings were secret and confidential by virtue of the provisions of Chapter 905 of the Florida St