UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/MATTHEWMAN JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. I SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHEREAS, Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 ("Petitioners") and the United States of America ("Respondent") (jointly referred to as "the parties") have agreed that a fair, efficient, and cost effective resolution of this dispute would avoid the unnecessary expenditure of substantial resources to litigate the dispute and hereby stipulate to the adequacy of consideration exchanged; and WHEREAS, the parties have negotiated in good faith and agreed that the best interests of all parties will be served by a settlement of this proceeding; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and recitals herein, the parties have agreed to settle the above-captioned case upon the following terms and conditions, intending to be legally bound, and agree as follows: 1. For purposes o
Summary
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/MATTHEWMAN JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. I SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHEREAS, Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 ("Petitioners") and the United States of America ("Respondent") (jointly referred to as "the parties") have agreed that a fair, efficient, and cost effective resolution of this dispute would avoid the unnecessary expenditure of substantial resources to litigate the dispute and hereby stipulate to the adequacy of consideration exchanged; and WHEREAS, the parties have negotiated in good faith and agreed that the best interests of all parties will be served by a settlement of this proceeding; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and recitals herein, the parties have agreed to settle the above-captioned case upon the following terms and conditions, intending to be legally bound, and agree as follows: 1. For purposes o
Persons Referenced (3)
“...ection responsible for handling FOIA and Privacy Act requests. If counsel for Jane Doe #1 file a FOIA request with the FBI seeking investigative recordings of Alfredo R...”
Jeffrey Epstein“... to the investigation conducted by them in the Southern District of Florida of Jeffrey Epstein and his co-conspirators, notwithstanding any general rule or regulation allowing earlier destruction of...”
Alfredo Rodriguez“...ne Doe #1 file a FOIA request with the FBI seeking investigative recordings of Alfredo Rodriguez, the defendant named in Southern District of Florida Case No. 10-80015-Cr-Marra, counsel for Jane Doe...”
Tags
Ask AI About This Document
Extracted Text (OCR)
Technical Artifacts (1)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
www.fbi.govRelated Documents (6)
EFTA02729648
AFFIDAVIT OF BRADLEY JAMES EDWARDS
Epstein Depositions
10. 11. 12. l3. 14. 16. 17. l8. 19. Jeffrey Epstein v. Bradley J. Edwards, et Case No.: 50 2009 CA Attachments to Statement of Undisputed Facts Deposition of Jeffrey Epstein taken March 17, 2010 Deposition of Jane Doe taken March 11, 2010 (Pages 379, 380, 527, 564?67, 568) Deposition of LM. taken September 24, 2009 (Pages 73, 74, 164, 141, 605, 416) Deposition ofE.W. taken May 6, 2010 (1 15, 1.16, 255, 205, 215?216) Deposition of Jane Doe #4 (32-34, 136) Deposition of Jeffrey Eps
Case 09-34791-RBR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs I UNITED STATES, Defendants JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO THE GOVERNMENT REGARDING CO-CONSPIRATOR IMMUNITY PROVISION AND RELATED SUBJECTS COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 ("the victims), by and through undersigned counsel, and request the defendant United States (hereinafter "the Government") to produce within 30 days the original or best copy of the items listed herein below for inspection and/or copying, pursuant to the Court's Order (DE 99) directing discovery in this case, the Court's Order denying the Government's motion to dismiss and lifting stay of discovery (DE 189), the Court's Omnibus Order (DE 190), and the Court's Order Denying Motion to Join (DE 324): BACKGROUND As the Government will recall, the victims have repeatedly asked the Government to stipulate to undisputed facts in thi
[REDACTED - Survivor] v. Alan Dershowitz – Allegations of Sex Trafficking, NPA Manipulation, and Defamation
The complaint provides a dense web of alleged connections between Alan Dershowitz, Jeffrey Epstein, former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, and the 2008 non‑prosecution agreement (NPA). It cites specif Roberts alleges she was trafficked by Epstein from 2000‑2002 and forced to have sex with Dershowitz. Dershowitz is accused of helping draft and pressure the government into the 2008 NPA that shielded
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.