Epstein Secrets

ENT: Jeffrey Epstein, via video conference Stan Sanders, Videograpber 1 2 3 4 Page 134 PROCEEDINGS

have to be the Jane Doe; Jane Doe? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Are you aware of any individuals that Miss - 7 Mr. Edwards represents, other than you, a and E.W.? 8 A. No. 9 Q. All right. Then it goes down — again, 1 10 take you back where it says: "Jane Doe was identified 11. via the FBI's investigati

25 Federal, local, that you had been to Mr. Er:stain's home; Page 136 Q. Okay. would be -- 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. — you would assume. C.W. would be E.W., and 4 you would have to be the Jane Doe; Jane Doe? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Are you aware of any individuals that Miss - 7 Mr. Edwards represents, oth

om? 2 A It was a little bit bigger. Obviously it was 3 configured differently. Thin isn't a rectangular 4 office. I worked for Marty Fine and Bernie 4 Jacobson in Miami. They didn't have an open door / policy. • So their office was set up in the ➢ane way 9 as Rothstein? 10 Il 12 13 la

S to strike. 14 THE MITNESS: Ho. Is BY MR. SCAROLA: IS Q If Jeffrey Epstein alleges in this 19 complaint against Bradley Edwards that III., E.W. or 24 Jane Doe voluntarily consented to their sexual 21 molestation, could Jeffrey Epstein have possibly made 22 that claim on the basis of any

So.2d 404 (Fla.1991) (Father prosecuted for crime of video recording of minor daughter in violation of statute concerning depiction of sex acts); Sanders State, 568 So.2d 1014 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (Father prosec- uted for lewd and lascivious acts against minor daughter). FN6. See, e.g., Zordan I Pag

ATE OF FLORIDA, E.W., THE PALM BEACH POST, B.B, Respondents. E.W.'S SEALED REQUEST TO DISMISS THE PETITION FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION Respondent, E.W., would show the Court as follows: 1. This Court lacks jurisdiction to hear this petition. The order under review is a non-final order for which no