Epstein Secrets

; Illinois: Ill. S.Ct. Rule 402(f); Indiana: Ind. R. Evid. 410; Iowa: Iowa R. Evid. 5.410; Kentucky: Ky R. Evid. 410; Louisiana: LSA- C.E. Art. 410; Maine: Maine R. Evid. 410; Maryland: Md. Rules, Rule 5-410; Massachusetts: Mass. R. Crim. P. 12(f); Michigan: Mich. R. Evid. 410; Minnesota: Minn. R. Evi

r was to provide the courts with the flexibility to develop rules of privilege on a case-by-case basis . . . and to leave the door open to change." Trammel, 445 U.S. at 47 (internal quotation marks omitted). In Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1 (1996), the Supreme Court explored the considerations which g

for crimes that are `factually related' to a charged offense. Several of these courts have interpreted Brewer v. Williams , 430 U.S. 387 (1977) and Maine v. Moulton , 474 U.S. 159 — both of which were decided well before McNeil — to support this view, which respondent now invites us to approve. We dec

luding relevant evidence has a public good transcending the normally predominant principle of utilizing all rational means for ascertaining truth." Trammel v. United States , 445 U.S. 40, 50 (1980) (internal quotation omitted). See also In re Grand Jury Subpoena , 274 F.3d 563, 571 (1st Cir. 2001) ("Be

able and Ream& Number Rs* Rare Fee- Airtime LO Taal CL Called Cali To Min Code Pd tare Charge DA Charge Rem Day Date Tim. 1 Sun 11/27 Maine 2 11/27 10.SSIN 1 11/17 11107171 11 37 11,201,1 =COM CL ) en II 110/1 0.00 1100112 CL 2 3.112 II Ia 0.00 11103141 Ct. 1 MO R Ile

T PL 10 1 0.00 sTOMt P2. MA 0.00 16S 7 s 11/24 10:22W4 a PAM Ft MA] 0.00 161 11/24 10:52AN %PALI Pt. WPA2 0.00 190 11/24 10:55API Trammel. WPA2 0.00 191 11/24 10:54.1.11 FTLAW:. WI. HPA2 0.00 Clringes Incurred While Roam:1g in l).%) I( iNA. El. 191 11/24 12:11PM STUART IL