Epstein Secrets

neve/- received one legal letter from anybody because, you know what, they don t wain me in court." [••.1 "I have entails when' says in an entail David Boles doesn't think that I can stand up in court. These girls are not reliable witnesses." EFTA01652365 ladyvictoriahervey 0 33m Dole & Kom • Phara Oh

FEEDING FRENZY?! For six years as I fought two cancas, NOT ONE AUTHORITY FIGURE HAS PROTECTED ME POST USURY. Cy Vance said he would assist me until David BOWS was too "busy" to assist. I NEED TO BE PROTECTED. Maxwell threatened to murder me in multiple occasions for DECADES! Not one other victim has

bout an appeal process. Sigrid McCauley and David BOIES lied to both me and my sisterM claiming we could

rgw'ntele.Oihei% S n f so Kindly MAKE A CONNECT. the second pad is oar hinted be Addy. whom f feel end befriend Jurist the Atunth hill His two. Stamm WM...cis Whitney Webb', boyfriend wind cuts tooth baby daddy/ Aa end Nadu tuned me 0•10 him beg week And I liked him ;month, A. a SA victims hims

ty contends that the communications at issue were "settlement communications." The relevant meetings between Dershowitz and counsel for non-party David Boies, that are at issue and the subject of Dershowitz's Affidavit were not settlement discussions but rather were an attempt to resolve factual disputes

ead, the issue presented in the motion is whether baseless objections to the discovery before trial of those communications between Dershowitz and Boies and others as somehow "privileged" should be overruled. The cases on which relies did not seal anything; they simply held that evidence in the pub

concept of "discoverability." The cases relies upon — Sea Cabin, Inc. v. Scott, Bark, Royce & Harris, P.A., 496 So.2d 163 (Ha. 4th DCA 1986), and Stamm v. Stamm, 489 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), are both quoted in motion for the proposition that settlement proposals are not admissible into evid

ty contends that the communications at issue were "settlement communications." The relevant meetings between Dershowitz and counsel for non-party David Boies, that are at issue and the subject of Dershowitz's Affidavit were not settlement discussions but rather were an attempt to resolve factual disputes

ead, the issue presented in the motion is whether baseless objections to the discovery before trial of those communications between Dershowitz and Boies and others as somehow "privileged" should be overruled. The cases on which relies did not seal anything; they simply held that evidence in the pub

concept of "discoverability." The cases relies upon — Sea Cabin, Inc. v. Scott, Bark, Royce & Harris, P.A., 496 So.2d 163 (Ha. 4th DCA 1986), and Stamm v. Stamm, 489 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), are both quoted in motion for the proposition that settlement proposals are not admissible into evid