Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 1 of 19 JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-cv-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON ----------~! JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. ----------~! JANEDOENO.4, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON __________ _,! 1 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 2 of 19 JANE DOE NO. 5, Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON ----------~! CASE NO.: 08-80994-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 6, Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. ----------~/ CASE NO.: 08-80993-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE NO. 7, Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. C.M.A., Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. I CASE NO.: 08-80811-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON ___________ .! 2 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 3 of 19 JANE DOE, Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, Defendants. CASE NO.: 08-80893-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON -----------~' DOE II, Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN et al, Defendants. CASE NO.: 09-80469-CIV-MARRA-JOHNSON ----------~' JANE DOE NO. 101, CASE NO.: 09-80591-CIV-MARRA-JOHNSON Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN Defendant. -----------' JANE DOE NO. 102, CASE NO.: 09-80656-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. __________ ___,! Reply To Plaintiffs', Jane Does 2-7, Response In Opposition To Epstein's Motion To Compel And/Or Identify Jane Does In The Style Of This Case And Motion To Identify Jane Doe In Third-Party Subpoenas For Purposes Of Discovery, Or Alternatively, Motion To Dismiss Sua Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law 3 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 4 of 19 Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein" or "Defendant"), by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby files his Reply to Plaintiffs', Jane Does 2-7, Response in Opposition to Epstein's Reply To Plaintiffs', Jane Does 2-7, Response In Opposition To Epstein's Motion To Compel And/Or Identify Jane Doe In The Style Of This Case And Motion To Identify Jane Doe In Third-Party Subpoenas For Purposes Of Discovery, Or Alternatively, Motion To Dismiss Sue Sponte, With Incorporated Memorandum Of Law (the "Motion to Identify"). In support, Mr. Epstein states as follows: I. Introduction 1. Prior to these cases being consolidated, Epstein filed separate Motions to Identify in each of the cases filed by Jane Does 2-7. (DE 91 - Jane Doe 2, DE 84 - Jane Doe 3, DE 101- Jane Doe 4, DE 86 - Jane Doe 5, DE 41 - Jane Doe 6, and DE 52 - Jane Doe 7 ). Plaintiff filed their collective or omnibus response to the above matters in the Case No.: 80119, which can be found at DE 114. 2. Epstein filed his Motion to Identify for the sole purpose of obtaining discovery related to the allegations in Plaintiffs' respective complaints and to properly defend and investigate the matters that have been filed against him as would ANY Defendant. However, Plaintiffs gather together in a continued effort to stonewall and prevent discovery of their past medical, psychological and employment histories, and for good reason - Plaintiffs' damages will be substantially reduced due to several preexisting and diagnosed conditions for which they now attempt to pawn off on Epstein in an effort to increase their damages. Appalling incidents took place in each of the Plaintiffs' lives prior to any of their alleged encounters with Epstein including, but not limited to, rape, sexual abuse, molestation, witnessing close friends or family members committing 4 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 5 of 19 suicide, certain Plaintiffs having suicidal thoughts, or attempting to commit suicide, physical and verbal abuse by family members etc... Those incidents (described below) Jed to each of the Plaintiffs' respective preexisting conditions and were not highlighted for the court in Plaintiffs' expert's affidavit attached to Plaintiffs' Opposition Motion (i.e., the Affidavit of Gilbert W. Kliman, M.D.). Instead of addressing each Jane Doe individually and highlighting their past experiences prior to Epstein (which are obviously relevant to damages), Plaintiffs' expert simply touts his credentials in his generalized affidavit and lists various tests he either performed or intends to perform on Plaintiffs, thereby joining in on this organized and calculated effort to prevent discovery. In fact, it appears Dr. Kliman had each Plaintiff complete a questionnaire. Is it Plaintiffs' position as well the Defendant is not entitled to that information? 3. In fact, it appears Dr. Kliman had each Plaintiff complete a questionnaire However, Epstein's expert, Dr. Richard C.W. Hall, has addressed the medical/psychological histories, criminal histories, family histories and the past life experiences of each Jane Doe by way of separate affidavit and has provided this court with sufficient reason to grant Epstein's Motion to Identify. 1 Each of the Plaintiff's histories is outlined in Dr. Hall's Affidavits attached hereto and will be discussed in great detail below. 4. Next, Plaintiffs make much of the fact that Epstein is attempting to hann them by way of identifying each of them in the style of their respective cases. While the undersigned's experience is that once identified in a public pleading drones of individuals 1 In making his Affidavits, Dr. hall reviewed voluminous documents (i.e., boxes full of documents including criminal histories and Dr. Kliman's report/interview). The undersigned is prepared to provide those documents to the court for in camera inspection should the court require same. However, in light of the number of documents reviewed by Dr. Hall in making his Affidavits, the undersigned did not file those documents with the clerk so as not require the clerk additional and unnecessary work. 5 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 6 of 19 come forward with information refuting the Plaintiffs' allegations, Epstein will withdraw that particular relief if Epstein is permitted to conduct the necessary and regular discovery related to Plaintiffs' allegations in their complaint (i.e., to identify each Jane Doe in third-party subpoenas and to issue those subpoenas to third-party treaters and cmTent and former employers and others such that Epstein can obtain records related directly to Plaintiffs' claims and damages for severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological and emotional damages, etc ... ). Cherenfant v. Nationwide Credit, Inc., 2004 WL 5315889 (S.D. Fla. 2004)(order allowing discovery of medical records consistent with Plaintiff's allegations in complaint). Failure to allow Epstein discovery is severely prejudicing Epstein and, therefore, should be considered on an emergency basis by this court. If regular discovery is not permitted, how can any defendant be expected to defend the allegations made against him by any Plaintiff, Jane Doe or otherwise? Without the healthcare provider information and employment history, it will be impossible to conduct both thorough depositions of the Plaintiffs and a meaningful independent medical/psychological examination by Epstein's defense expert, Dr. Hall. This case should be treated no differently than any other case in which a Plaintiff seeks personal injury damages. 5. Once again, this court has already ruled that Plaintiffs can only be deposed once (Case #80119, DE 98 at '1[5 - "Defendant is limited to a single deposition of each Plaintiff, during which defendant may depose the Plaintiff as both a party and a witness."). However, it appears that Epstein is being compelled to take Plaintiffs' depositions and independent medical evaluations without ANY medical or employment histories. As such, the undersigned will not be able to cross-examine Plaintiffs about 6 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 7 of 19 their past medical and employment histories and, as a result, Epstein's expert physician will not have the benefit of that type of questioning and answers thereto before the compulsory psychological/psychiatric examination of the Plaintiffs. This is not only unheard-of, but it is inherently unfair, nonsensical, flies directly in the face of the liberal discovery rules and directly violates Epstein's due process rights. This court has ordered that we move these cases forward. However, Plaintiffs' strategy is to delay or prevent the very discovery this court said Defendant should undertake! 6. Moreover, Plaintiffs agreed at the June 12, 2009 hearing on Defendant's Motion to Stay that regular discovery could proceed. See Composite Exhibit "A" at pages 26-30 & 33-34. For instance, the court asked Plaintiffs' attorneys the following questions: The Court: [) So again, I just want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend a case being prosecuted against him or her, that that in and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to criminal prosecution? (Ex. "A," p.26). *** The Court: You agree he should be able to take the ordinary steps that a defendant in a ci vii action can take and not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? (Ex. "A," p.27). *** The Court: Okay. But again, you're in agreement with everyone else so far that's spoken on behalf of a plaintiff that defending the case in the normal course of conducting discovery and filing motions would not be a breach? (Ex. "A," p.30). Mr. Horowitz - counsel for Jane Does 2-7: Subject to your rulings, of course, yes. (Ex. "A," p.30). *** The Court: But you're not taking the position that other than possibly doing something in litigation which is any other discovery, motion practice, investigations that someone would ordinarily do in the course of 7 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 8 of 19 defending a civil case would constitute a violation of the agreement? (Ex. "A," p.34). Ms. Villafana: No, your honor. I mean, civil litigation is civil litigation, and being able to take discovery is part of what civil litigation is all about. ... But. .. , Mr. Epstein is entitled to take the deposition of a Plaintiff and to subpoena records, etc. (Ex. "A," p.34) 7. It is clear from the transcript attached as Exhibit "A" that each of the Plaintiffs' attorneys, including Mr. Horowitz for Jane Does 2-7, expected and conceded that regular discovery would take place (i.e., discovery, motion practice, depositions, requests for records, and investigations). Despite the foregoing, Plaintiffs now argue that they should not be subject to regular discovery procedures by serving subpoenas on various third-parties which identify each Jane Doe by name for the purpose of obtaining relevant information related to claims that each of the Plaintiffs have made against Epstein. The truth is that this is just a front to cover-up each of the Plaintiffs' disturbed pasts and their preexisting conditions, which will arguably reduce their damages. Plaintiffs cannot expect this court to limit discovery directed at them simply because of the allegations they assert in the complaints (i.e., sexual battery). Sexual Battery is a tort, and discovery has always been permitted on such a cause of action despite the alleged facts surrounding such a claim. Plaintiffs must keep in mind that as pled, these cases are personal injury cases seeking personal injury damages. Plaintiffs cannot expect any special treatment from this court based on their self-serving allegations which merely seek to limit discovery. 8. Surprisingly, Plaintiffs' counsel requests that this court substantially limit the rules of discovery by allowing Plaintiffs to provide Defendant with the requested information only after same has been in Plaintiff's possession. No authority is provided 8 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 9 of 19 by Plaintiffs allowing for such a procedure. The undersigned finds it hard to believe that any firm would ever allow an opposing party to request records for it and mail those records to the requesting firm only after the opposing firm had an opportunity to review and filter through same. No valid discovery objections or exemptions exist preventing necessary and reasonable discovery. To hold otherwise prevents Mr. Epstein from preparing and defending this matter. Plaintiffs' requests in this regard should be flat-out denied. 9. For the courts ease of reference, the transcripts, tapes and pages referenced in Dr. Hall's Affidavits and referenced throughout this motion are generated from the interview Dr. Kliman, the Plaintiffs" expert, conducted on each of said Plaintiffs. Should the court wish to review those transcripts, tapes and interviews, same will be provided upon request. II. Reply and Memorandum of Law a. The Allegations in the Amended Complaints As to Jarie Does 2-7 10. The amended complaints filed by Jane Does 2-7 against Jeffrey Epstein make allegations of sexual assault and abuse upon a minor and seek damages in excess of $50 million. Jane Does 2-7 allege confusion, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, and severe psychological and emotional injuries. It is further alleged that they suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent traumatic injuries, including mental, psychological, and emotional damages. Plaintiffs allege intentional infliction of emotional distress, severe emotional distress, severe mental anguish and pain. They further allege that they suffered personal injury including mental, psychological and emotional damage. Dr. Hall Affidavit of Jane Does 2-4, Exhibits "B-G," respectively. 9 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 10 of 19 b. Jane Doe Number 2 11. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 2, reported to Dr. Kliman that as a result of her relationship with her parents, she "shut herself out to the world". Ex. "B" at 'l[l 7. She reports that her parents did not pay attention to her, that her father struck her and her brothers, that her father assaulted her mother and struck Plaintiff across the face, and that she was sexually assaulted by her step brother when she forgot to lock her door before bed and he snuck back into the bed naked and got under the covers; and she also claims that the incident with her stepbrother is" ... a big part of why [she is the way she is.]" Ex. "B" at 1['ll19, 21, 22, 35, 36, 38 & 39. Plaintiff also reports that when she was 16, her stepbrother beat her mom, sister and the Plaintiff, and that her stepfather was always yelling at her, was violent with her mother and would send Plaintiff to bed without dinner after smacking her across the face. Ex. "B" at 'l['l[22, 35 and 36. Plaintiff has been thinking of hurting herself for three or four years, and she reports seeing a counselor with her mother relative to the above incidents and her counselor said she was bi-polar or had obsessive compulsive disorder. Ex. "B" at 'l['l[25, 26 & 45. Plaintiff reports drug use at the age of 12, including marijuana and Xanax, and cocaine use at 18 or 19 years of age. Ex. "B" at 'l['l[28-29 &51. Plaintiff also claims to have been sexually assaulted by her 19- year-old step brother or someone she knew, and she states she was scared of her stepbrother because nobody could ever "stop him." Ex. "B" at 'l['l[38 and 39. c. Jane Doe Number 3 12. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 3, reports seeing a therapist in Palm Beach County at age 11, and believes that she had previously been diagnosed with depression following her parents' divorce at age 11." Ex. "C" at'l['l[14 and 17. Plaintiff attempted suicide five 10 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 11 of 19 times, beginning at age 11, after her parents divorced. She attempted suicide on several occasions by running a car in a closed garage, by swallowing "a whole bunch of pills" and by cutting her wrists. Ex. "C" at US & 32. Between the ages of 9 and 11, Plaintiff's father was a heavy drinker, was verbally and physically abusive to her and physically abusive with her sister and her mother causing them to leave the house with their mother. Ex. "C" at '1!'1!21 & 33. Plaintiff claims her father suffers from depression and that while depressed he is distant, has angry spells, and she "worries what he will do ... he snaps so much." Ex. "C" at '1!22. Plaintiff was teased excessively at school, and began drinking at age 13 to the point of having blackouts. Ex. "C" at '1!'1!22, 27 & 35. At the age of 12, Plaintiff, and four other children, were given "pot" and molested all in one night by her best friend's brother, who had just gotten out of jail. Ex. "C" at '1!29. Then at the age 15, plaintiff was raped at a graduation party but never told anyone about it. Ex. "C" at '1!28. Plaintiff claims that Kevin Hoebee, who molested her, subsequently raped his own sister. Ex. "C" at '1!30. Plaintiff clearly had a turbulent family life. Ex. "C" at '1!34. As a result, Plaintiff notes she has seen many psychologists. Ex. "C" at '1!'1!19-20. 13. Dr. Hall also notes in paragraph 37 of his Affidavit that Jane Doe 3 gave information to Dr. Kliman relative to her alleged encounters with Epstein which directly conflict with her probable cause affidavit and the Palm Beach Police Incident Report. Ex. "C" a(1[37. d. Jane Doe Number 4 14. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 4, reports to Dr. Kliman a history of alcohol use and an ex-boyfriend who drank alcohol and used pills that were "a form of oxycodine [sic] a form of heroine [sic]." Ex. "D" at '1!14. Plaintiff obtained a restraining order against her 11 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 12 of 19 ex-boyfriend for, among other things, spitting in her face, pushing her and being abusive. Ex. "D" at 'l[15. While in high school, Plaintiff's friend, Chris, died in a motor vehicle accident, and she was in shock from his death for approximately 1 ½ to 2 years. It still bothers her today. Ex. "D" at 'l[l 7. Another close friend of Plaintiff, Jen, died in a motor vehicle accident which caused Plaintiff shock for approximate! y 2 months. Ex. "D" at 'll'l!17 & 19. On 10/31/04, Plaintiff, while intoxicated, had an altercation with her then boyfriend, Preston Vinyard. Ex. "D" at 'l[21. When the Police arrived, they found Plaintiff in her home with no shirt on; and Plaintiff refused to cooperate with the police and threatened to kill herself. Ex. "D" at 'l[21. Plaintiff's boyfriend, Preston Vinyard, has choked her, thrown her against a wall and onto the ground, dumped beer on her, threw cigarettes in her face, and has verbally abused her and threatened her friends and family. Ex. "D" at 1[23. Plaintiff has a record of DUI and shop lifting. Ex. "D" at 'l[20 & 22. Finally, Plaintiff reports talking with two psychiatrists at age 16 or 17 due to family issues and boyfriend issues, but makes no mention to Dr. Kliman of telling the psychiatrists of her alleged encounters with Epstein. Ex. "D" at 'l[16. Moreover, while Plaintiff denies recruiting other girls relative to her alleged encounters with Epstein, on page 24 of the Palm Beach Police Report, Plaintiff said she left a note for Epstein that indicated "for a good time call [Plaintiff] and [friend]" and left the girls' phone numbers. Ex. "D" at 'l[l6. e. Jane Doe Number 5 15. Plaintiff, Jane Doe 5, reported to Dr. Kliman that her mother's sisters paid a male to rape her (the mother) in a closet at school, that her mother had been raped three times, twice in childhood (which included the mother's uncle) and once on a date. Ex. 12 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 13 of 19 "E" at '1[26. Plaintiff reports having suicidal thoughts in the 9th or 10 th grade. Ex. "E" at '1[27. During Plaintiff's sophomore and junior years of high school she drank every weekend and started trying drugs. Plaintiff's family psychiatric history includes: a history of a blood relative having been sexually abused, plaintiff's mother was physically abused by sisters, and plaintiff's father "was very irresponsible as a father figure when [she] was growing up" and she used drugs. Ex. "E" at '1[21. Her drug use includes marijuana and pain pills without prescription. Ex. "E" at '1[25. Plaintiff's stepfather hit her and, on one occasion, she even lost her hearing for two weeks. Ex. "E" at '1['1[22 & 24. Plaintiff finds her childhood hard to remember, unhappy and painful. Ex. "E" at '1[24. In addition, Plaintiff claims" ... girls [were] mean to [her] and even rumor[ed] that they would slice [her] throat when [she] was younger." Ex. "E" at '1[15. Plaintiff's parents eventually kicked her out of the family home when she was 18-years-old. f. Jane Doe Number 6 16. Plaintiff, Jane Doe Number 6's interrogatories note a diagnosis of PTSD following an auto accident in 2003. Ex. "F" at '1[14. A Petition for Involuntary Assessment for Substance Abuse, dated July 19, 2006, noted a domestic disturbance at Plaintiff's home with "threats to several family members as well as threats of suicide ... appeared to be under the influence of Zan ax [ sic J bars. . . She found her grandmother dead three weeks ago, may have pushed her over the edge." On January 31, 2007, Plaintiff pied guilty to grand theft and burglary, and was sentenced to a 30 day substance abuse program, 9 months community control, and 2 years probation. Ex. "F" at '1[17 On February 25, 2007, Plaintiff cutoff her monitoring bracelet and fled her residence violating probation, and she was arrested on March 9, 2007 and April 2, 2007 and was 13 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 14 of 19 ordered to undergo a mental health evaluation. Ex. "F" at 'l[l 7. On August 8, 2007, she was arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia and violated her probation again. Id. She was in jail for a period of 30 days until September 6, 2007 when she was found guilty of the violation of probation and sentenced to remain in jail for evaluation and treatment and then outpatient treatment as well as parenting classes. Id. Plaintiff was also charged with possession of a weapon on school property in November 2004. Ex. "F" at 'l[l8. 17. Plaintiff is also noted to have smoked marijuana with her father since the age 13 and also did Xanax Ex. "F" at 'l['l[l9 7 27. Plaintiff was placed in Growing Together Treatment Center on 3/10/06 and Baker Acted her on 4/7 /06. Id. Plaintiff has also been in several physical altercations with family and friends. Ex. "F" at 20-22. In particular, back on 8/27 /02, Plaintiff was followed home from school by four girls and allegedly battered by two of the girls. Ex. "F" at 'l[24. 18. Plaintiff, however, failed to report to Dr. Kliman that she witnessed a friend get electrocuted, and that her boyfriend shot and killed himself in front of her after they got into a fight. Ex. "F" at 'l[30. Plaintiff also saw court ordered therapists. Ex. "E" at'l[28. g. Jane Doe Number 7 19. Jane Doe 7 has withheld all pertinent records from discovery. While various conflicting statements are noted in Dr. Hall's affidavit, Ex. "G", the Defendant is unable to determine what prior existing conditions Jane Doe 7 had before her alleged encounters with Epstein. This is a direct result of Plaintiffs' collective efforts to prevent discovery all together. However, it is clear from Dr. Hall's Affidavit that Jane Doe 7 14 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 15 of 19 does have the propensity to lie in an attempt to further her case. III. Conclusion and Requested Relief 20. For further elaboration of Plaintiff's history and background, access to all available records is crucial to understand the impact of any of these events on Plaintiff's. See Exhibits "B-G." It is critical for an IME examiner to be able to make a cogent assessment of any plaintiff and to understand their medical, social, academic, psychological and psychiatric condition/state prior to any act of alleged victimization. See Exhibits "B-G." There are a number of variables that combine to determine the effects of such alleged victimization, including the type and character of the alleged assault, and key victim variables such as demographics, psychological reactions at the time of the trauma, previous psychiatric or psychological history, previous victimization history, current or previous psychological difficulties, and general personality dynamics and coping style, as well as sociocultural factors such as drug use/abuse; poverty; social inequity and/or inadequate social support; any previous history of abuse within or outside the family; whether individuals were abused by strangers, acquaintances or family members; and whether there was any history of indiscriminate behavior that may have placed them at increased risk. See Exhibits "B-G." It is important to know if there had been previous sexual conduct, contact with police or welfare agencies, alcohol or drug use/abuse, voluntary sexual activity, contraceptive use, genital infections, or apparent indifference to previous abuse. See Exhibits "B-G." It is also essential to understand the Plaintiffs' level of emotional support, whether any significant psychiatric illnesses were present, whether they were taking any medications (prescribed or non-prescribed), whether there had been previous suicide attempts, thoughts, plans, etc. See Exhibits "B- 15 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 16 of 19 G." Knowledge of Plaintiffs' relationships with their families and familial factors, including social disadvantage, family instability, impaired parent/child relationship, and parental adjustment difficulties is also critical. See Exhibits "B-O." It is, therefore, crucial that the independent medical examiner has available to him a full and complete record that includes medical, previous legal, social, criminal, academic, psychological and psychiatric records/data; psychological tests; laboratory tests; and clinical, hospital, physician records. See Exhibits "B-O." These, in essence, are the same and similar records that plaintiff's expert witness (Dr. Kliman) feels are essential for him to do an appropriate evaluation. See Exhibits "B-O.' To obtain the necessary information, it will be necessary to identify the plaintiff by name. See Exhibits "B-O." Such identification will not humiliate the plaintiff since all we are requesting is pertinent information as noted above relative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. See Exhibits "B-O." 21. Cherenfant v. Nationwide Credit, Inc., 2004 WL 5315889 (S.D. Fla. 2004) allows for the discovery sought in Sections II. a-g above and in Defendant's Motion to Identify. See also Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 26; Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 352 (1978); Dunbar v. U.S., 502 F.2d 206 (5th Cir. 1974); Rossbach v. Rundle, 128 F.Supp.2d 1348, 1354 (S.D. Fla. 200); Fed.R.Civ.Pro 33(b)(4)(Plaintiffs must show that the requests are unreasonable or burdensome, which they have failed to do in the instant matter); Panola Land Buyers Ass'n v. Shuman, 762 F.2d 1550, 1559 (11 th Cir. 1985); Ward v. Estaleiro Itajai SIA, 541 F.Supp.2d 1344, 1353-54 (S.D. Fla. 2008) (discussing the rules' intended limited court involvement in discovery). 22. It is clear that the requested relief/discovery goes to the heart of the 16 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 17 of 19 Plaintiffs' allegations. Therefore, to prevent meaningful and regular discovery is in direct contradiction of the Rules allowing for a liberal and broad discovery. In addition, allowing Plaintiffs' counsel to obtain and produce Defendant's discovery for him is not only absurd but not contemplated by the law or the Federal Rules. Wherefore, Epstein requests that he be granted leave to identify Plaintiffs by their legal names in Third-Party Subpoenas (but not file them in Court or, if required, in a redacted form), that Plaintiffs' requests to obtain discovery and then provide it to Defendant through their counsel be denied, or in the alternative, that this court dismiss these actions Certificate of Service I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Comt using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this £ day of !f,l,L( , 2009 u . CRITTON, JR., ESQ. oridaBarNo. 224162 [email protected] MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. Florida Bar #617296 [email protected] BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN 515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561/842-2820 Phone 17 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009

Page 18 of 19 561/515-3148 Fax (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Brad Edwards, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 [email protected] Fax: 305-931-0877 [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiffs Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th A venue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561-582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 [email protected] Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Hill, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 [email protected] [email protected] Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hae Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax [email protected] Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe Isidro M. Garcia, Esq. Garcia Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datura Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 18 Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2009