mitted to join [the other victims’] claim that the Government violated their rights under the CVRA. The factual details regarding with whom and where the Jane Does engaged in sexual activities are impertinent to this central claim (i.e., that they were known victims of Mr. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010765 --- PAGE BREA

d be permitted to join Petitioners’ claim that the Government violated their rights under the CVRA. The factual details regarding with whom and where the Jane Does engaged in sexual activities are immaterial and impertinent to this central claim (i.e., that they were known victims of Mr. Epstein and the Governme

d be permitted to join Petitioners’ claim that the Government violated their rights under the CVRA. The factual details regarding with whom and where the Jane Does engaged in sexual activities are immaterial and impertinent to this central claim (i.e., that they were known victims of Mr. Epstein and the Governme

st recent federal lawsuit last week, on behalf of the Jane Doe ‘ 101 who allegedly visited Epstein a few times whi

t he was vindicated. However, the judge does not address the veracity of Roberts’ claims, writing: “The factual details regarding with whom and where the Jane Does engaged in sexual activities are immaterial and impertinent to this central claim.” September: Roberts sues Maxwell in federal court in New York, cl