Epstein Secrets

ALFELD,STANLEY F DONAHUE,J BARRY ROGERS,HEATHER T RUSSO,CAROL BOARDMAN,D DI

INVESTMENTS INC STRYKER,JON BRODSKY,DAVID GOTTFRIED,ROBERT W TOWN OF PALM BEA

FEY,EDWARD G MINIKES,MICHAEL KOLLER,HELMUT BALLINGER,WALTER S SLOTKIN,M

2001/12/22tbusinemanedia-poet6 20. moncins-foimometha-deal-undone.h1mCrefrjeffreyeepsteink The Nor Turk Than. Retrieved November 7, 2016. 6. Can. David (October 19. 2004). "Radar Magazine Lines Up Financing' (haps lAvww.nytinics.corW2304/10/19ans.19rthathunl? _r-38kmf-reffreyeepsieln). Eke New York

general soaks information on financier Epociris philanthropy" (Mtpifwvivereuters commrtielt2015:03066is. epsteiri-charil8-idUSKLIN061200V20150306) Rogers. 'Billionaire in Palm Heidi sex scandal; Investigators: Money man JefIkey Epstein solicited teen masseuses" (lutpfAhesmokingguncomidocumentsistobi

reh (November 17. 201)7) "Cop( flops letting mogul gm off easy' kittpitivww.nyposteorWseven,11122007.'newsinarionalnev.:Ceops_rlops New York Post. Keller. Larry (February 6, 20081. 'Second teen-see sun seeks $50 million from Jeffrey Epstein" (https:hweb.archive.ortmehr200802091315054moRwww.palmbeael

in discussing how a court is to analyze the application of the privilege stated — ... It is for the court to say whether his silence is justified, Rogers v. United States 1951, 340 U.S. 367, 71 S.Ct. 438, and to require him to answer if 'it clearly appears to the court that he is mistaken.' Temple v.

ted information only if it "clearly appears" to the court that the witness was mistaken in his invocation of the privilege." (Emphasis added). In re Keller Financial Svcs., supra at 399, ciSgr Hoffman at 486. 12 EFTA00222536 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 65 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/25/2009 Pag

in discussing how a court is to analyze the application of the privilege stated — ... It is for the court to say whether his silence is justified, Rogers v. United States, 1951, 340 U.S. 367, 71 S.Ct. 438, and to require him to answer if 'it clearly appears to the court that he is mistaken.' Temple v

AYRAIN09 PaKO PS 4 24 C.M.A. v. Epstein, et al. Page 13 that the witness was mistaken in his invocation of the privilege." (Emphasis added). In re Keller Financial Svcs., supra at 399, .gr Hoffman, at 486. In the instant case, the privilege applies as Defendant EPSTEIN "has reasonable cause to appr

in discussing how a court is to analyze the application of the privilege stated — ... It is for the court to say whether his silence is justified, Rogers v. United States 1951, 340 U.S. 367, 71 S.Ct. 438, and to require him to answer if 'it clearly appears to the court that he is mistaken.' Temple v.

ted information only if it "clearly appears" to the court that the witness was mistaken in his invocation of the privilege." (Emphasis added). In re Keller Financial Svcs., supra at 399, ciSgr Hoffman at 486. 12 EFTA00067394 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 65 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/25/2009 Pag

w Office of Adam A. Carter, Washington, DC, for Appellant. Neil Matthew Corwin, U.S. Attorney's Office, New York, NY, for Appellees. Before: and ROGERS, Circuit Judges, SIIIMnior Circuit Judge. JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. "1 This case was considered on the record from O 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to

or controversy within the meaning of Article III of the Constitu- tion and the Federal Declaratory Judgmet Act, 23 U.S.C. Sec. 2201. Septum, Inc. Keller, 614 F2d 456 (5th Cir.1980). Synthesising the averments of the com- plaint, the consolidated pre-trial order, the trial transcript, and the May 16,