Epstein Secrets

velopment of [evidentiary] privileges." Adkins v. Christie, 488 F.3d 1324, 1328 (11th Cir. 2007), quoting T

ers and memos in which Mr. Epstein's counsel addressed the reasons why Mr. Epstein should not be federally prosecuted. 8 EFTA00177817 States v. Adelman, 458 F.3d 791 (8th Cir. 2006), also involved statements made by the defendant to federal prosecutors; the defendant's statements were made in meetin

velopment of [evidentiary] privileges!" Adkins v. Christie, 488 F.3d 1324, 1328 (11th Cir. 2007), quoting T

ve no room to doubt that the parties were engaged in serious negotiations to resolve the federal criminal investigation of Epstein. United States v. Adelman, 458 F.3d 791 (8th Cir. 2006), also involved statements made by the defendant to federal prosecutors; the defendant's statements were made in meeti

lopment of [evidentiary] privileges.'" Adkins v. Christie, 488 F.3d 1324, 1328 (11th Cir. 2007), quoting T

ral court and "comparable state procedures." Fed. R. ' The other two cases relied on by the district court are equally inapposite. United States v. Adelman, 458 F.3d 791 (8th Cir. 2006), involved statements made by the defendant to federal prosecutors during meetings at which she was told, according to

elopment of [evidentiary] privileges!" Adkins v. Christie, 488 F.3d 1324, 1328 (11th Cir. 2007), quoting T

ve no room to doubt that the parties were engaged in serious negotiations to resolve the federal criminal investigation of Epstein. United States v. Adelman, 458 F.3d 791 (8th Cir. 2006), also involved statements made by the defendant to federal prosecutors; the defendant's statements were made in meeti