Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 1 of
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 1 of 11 EXHIBIT 15 EFTA00081262 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 2 of 11 09/15,2007 03:16 PM To leficowItzekIrkland.com, Pifikowitz@kirkland.com cc bcc subject JE negoliabons Ili Jay -- Sorry to trouble you over the weekend. Here are the revised documents with the 403 charge. I have gotten some negative reaction to the assault charge with as the victim, since she is considered one of the main perpetrators of the offenses that we planned to charge in the indictment. Can you talk to Mr. Epstein about a young woman rumen We have hearsay evidence that she traveled on Mr. Epstein's airplane when she was under 18, in around the 2000 or 2001 time frame. That falls outside the statute of limitations, but perhaps we could construct a 371 conspiracy around that? Let me know what you think. Thank you. «<Attachment InfOiniallOilCnarcling quo and 11.
Summary
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 1 of 11 EXHIBIT 15 EFTA00081262 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 2 of 11 09/15,2007 03:16 PM To leficowItzekIrkland.com, Pifikowitz@kirkland.com cc bcc subject JE negoliabons Ili Jay -- Sorry to trouble you over the weekend. Here are the revised documents with the 403 charge. I have gotten some negative reaction to the assault charge with as the victim, since she is considered one of the main perpetrators of the offenses that we planned to charge in the indictment. Can you talk to Mr. Epstein about a young woman rumen We have hearsay evidence that she traveled on Mr. Epstein's airplane when she was under 18, in around the 2000 or 2001 time frame. That falls outside the statute of limitations, but perhaps we could construct a 371 conspiracy around that? Let me know what you think. Thank you. «<Attachment InfOiniallOilCnarcling quo and 11.
Persons Referenced (4)
“...EFNDER ACOSTA UNITE TATES ATTORNEY By: JEFFREY EPSTEIN, DEFENDANT T By: JAY LEFKOWITZ, ESQ. ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT Page 7 of 7 08-80736-CV-MARRA R FP WPB 000244...”
Jane Doe #1“...te the privacy protection acco y 18 U.S.C. § 3509 to a child victim, that is, Jane Doe #1; in violation of Title 18, United Sta de, Sections 403 and 2. COUNT 2 In or...”
Jeffrey Epstein“...A CASE NO. 18 U.S.C. § 403 18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(5) UNITED STATES OF CA vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. A ROORMATION The United States Attorney charges that: COUNT 1...”
Alexander Acosta“...is, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 113(a)(5). D • R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES A Mk$ thr ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY A F T 2 08-807...”
Tags
Ask AI About This Document
Extracted Text (OCR)
Technical Artifacts (4)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
9:08-CV-807369:08-CV-80736-KAMleficowitzekirkland.compifikowitz@kirkland.comRelated Documents (6)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S INITIAL DISCLOSURES Respondent United States of America, by and through its undersigned counsel, makes its Initial Disclosures, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1)(A), and state: Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1)(A)fil: 1. R. Alexander Acosta Dean, School of Law Florida International University Rafael Diaz-Balart Hall 11200 S.W. 8'h Street Miami, Florida 33199 (305) 348-1118 Dean Acosta was the United States Attorney, Southern District of Florida, during the time when the criminal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein was opened in the U.S. Attorney's Office, and the non-prosecution agreement was negotiated. 2. was the First Assistant U.S. Attorney in the U.S. Attorney's Office, during the time when the criminal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein was opened, and the non-prosecution agreement was negot
Case 09-34791-RBR
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 1 of 70
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 1 of 70 EXHIBIT A PRIVILEGE LOG - WITH VICTIMS' OBJECTIONS EFTA00208682 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 2 of 70 PRIVILEGE LOG - WITH VICTIMS' OBJECTIONS Key to Objections (linking to Victims' Motion to Compel Production of Docments that Are Not Prig ileged Objection General Objections -- Inadequate Privilege Log Failure to Prove Factual Underpinnings of Privilege Claim Waiver of Confidentiality Government's Fiduciary Duty to Crime Victims Bars Privilege Communications Facilitating Crime-Fraud-Misconduct Not Covered Factual Materials Not Covered Documents Not Prepared in Anticipation of CVRA Litigation Attorney Client Objections - Ordinary Governmental Communications Not Covered Attorney-Client Relationship Not Established Deliberative Process Objections - Privilege Not Properly Invoked Final Decision Exempted from Privilege Qualified Privilege Ove
Subject: SDNY News Clips Tuesday, July 9, 2019
From: Cc: Bcc Subject: SDNY News Clips Tuesday, July 9, 2019 Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 21:12:37 +0000 Importance: Normal Attachments: 2019_7-9.pdf SDNY News Clips Tuesday, July 9, 2019 EFTA00076625 Contents Public Corruption Epstein Complex Frauds lure Terrorism & Narcotics Wise Honest Matters of Interest Trump Can't Block Twitter Followers US Appeals Court Rules Judicial Review of Claims of Government Misconduct in Parallel Investigations Barr Says Legal Path to Census Citizenship Question Exists but He Gives No Details Public Corruption Epstein Who Protected Jeffrey Epstein? New York Times By The Editorial Board 7/8/19 On Monday, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York unsealed a 14-page indictment against Jeffrey Epstein, charging the wealthy financier with operating and conspiring to operate a sex trafficking ring of girls out of his luxe homes on Manhattan's Upper East Side and in Palm Beach, Fla., "among other locations."
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-CI V-Marra/Matthewman JANE DOE # I and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS' FIRST REOUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO THE GOVERNMENT The United States (hereinafter the "government") hereby responds to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's First Request for Admissions to the Government Regarding Questions Relevant to Their Pending Action Concerning the Crime Victims Rights Act (hereinafter the "Request for Admissions"), and states as follows:' I. The government admits that the FBI and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("USAO") conducted an investigation into Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") and developed evidence and information in contemplation of a potential federal prosecution against Epstein for many federal sex offenses. Except as otherwise admitted above, the government denies Request No. I. The government's res
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 9:08-ev-80736-Civ-ICAM JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2 I UNITED STATES JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER COME NOW Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to file this response in opposition to Epstein's Motion for a Protective Confidentiality Order (DE 247). Epstein's motion is a thinly-disguised attempt to relitigate issues already covered by the court's earlier ruling eleven months ago (DE 188), which allowed the victims to file correspondence relating to Epstein's non-prosecution agreement in the public court file. Rather than reverse its previous ruling, this Court should reaffirm it — and allow the important issues presented by this case to be litigated in the light of day. BACKGROUND Because of Epstein's penchant for relitigating issues that have already been decided, it
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.