Epstein Secrets

and for what purpose. Bryon, Harless, Schaffer, Reid & Assocs., Inc. v. State ex rel, Schellenberg, 3

, 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. Commonwealth, 1880, 75 Va. 892, 899. However, if the witness, upon interposing his claim, were required to prove the hazard in the sense in whic

is our oate. ma Ned Dooms ie 9 Smut Sou", Enrol Reid emend Pa -toff a. I TO rrio OUT IT A Mitt OtPOS

u ritereni Ara hombre/ tie &mullet te Ihe ernann' or your taiiiiiii041•041nR ; hpalare Inkaretoi &OA EltOID/C FLOSS Trent *PON It , DOPM4 ACCOA Tempel a latorsbitin ATM card Nagy ashy prate as seal as assile are nutter prank.: bete/ S.M.* moss Way MIRO rfloidy !Tin 4 Winn t) Ig.00pr IN CASE OF ER

specifically said that our working relationship with the actress was nothing short of spectacular." He also shoots down the mag's source who claims Reid needed to have a baby sitter escort her out every night tomake sure she didn't wake up with any regrets. We hear . . . THAT eyebrows are flexing o

ement. Yet the anti-Semitic charge disturbed Jews whom I asked about it in Palm Beach. Michael Resnick, rabbi at the oldest synagogue on the island, Temple Emanu-El (circa the sixties), says he strongly doubts that Epstein is a modern Dreyfus. "There's no way, htteritunmuf rlinkahilitv rnm/nt/cnt?acti