Cc: r>
From: To: ' Cc: r> " , '1 Subject: RE: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York - concession by Epstein's attorney that NPA only applies in Florida Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 19:07:23 +0000 Attachments: Exh_067_EPSTEIN_PLEA_CONFERENCE_CRIMINAL_06-30-08.pdf HIM, You and the team there may have already seen this, but in view of the importance of the issue, I wanted to pass it along. Attached is the transcript of the hearing from Florida state court in 2008, in which Epstein pled guilty to Florida state charges. During the course of questioning by the judge, Epstein's Florida attorney (Jack Goldberger) stated (on Epstein's behalf) that the NPA contained an obligation by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida "not [to] prosecute Mr. Epstein in the Southern District of Florida ...." See page 38 (emphasis added). I wanted you to be sure to have this information, as the subject is likely to be important. for Jane Doe 1 (phone
Summary
From: To: ' Cc: r> " , '1 Subject: RE: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York - concession by Epstein's attorney that NPA only applies in Florida Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 19:07:23 +0000 Attachments: Exh_067_EPSTEIN_PLEA_CONFERENCE_CRIMINAL_06-30-08.pdf HIM, You and the team there may have already seen this, but in view of the importance of the issue, I wanted to pass it along. Attached is the transcript of the hearing from Florida state court in 2008, in which Epstein pled guilty to Florida state charges. During the course of questioning by the judge, Epstein's Florida attorney (Jack Goldberger) stated (on Epstein's behalf) that the NPA contained an obligation by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida "not [to] prosecute Mr. Epstein in the Southern District of Florida ...." See page 38 (emphasis added). I wanted you to be sure to have this information, as the subject is likely to be important. for Jane Doe 1 (phone
Tags
Ask AI About This Document
Extracted Text (OCR)
Related Documents (6)
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2008 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. VICTIM'S MOTION TO UNSEAL NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT COMES NOW the Petitioners, Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2, by and through their undersigned attorneys, pursuant to the Crime Victim's Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3771 ("CVRA"), and file this motion to unseal the non-prosecution agreement that has been provided to their attorneys under seal in this case. The agreement should be unsealed because no good cause exists for sealing it. Moreover, the Government has inaccurately described the agreement in its publicly-filed pleadings, creating a false impression that the agreement protects the victims. Finally, the agreement should be unsealed to facilitate consultation by victims' counsel with others involved who have
Epstein deposition excerpt cited in Florida civil case alleging child sexual abuse
Epstein deposition excerpt cited in Florida civil case alleging child sexual abuse The passage merely references a prior deposition where Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment, offering no new names, transactions, or actionable details beyond what is already public. It confirms existing allegations but provides no novel leads for investigation. Key insights: Cites Epstein's deposition on March 17, 2010; Notes Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment when asked about sexual preferences; Mentions adverse inference doctrine in civil procedure
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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-MarratIVIatthewman JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. UNITED STATES' NOTICE OF FILING THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL PRIVILEGE LOG Pursuant to the Court's June 18, 2013 Omnibus Order (DE 190), the Respondent, United States of America, by and through the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney, hereby gives notice of its filing of its Third Supplemental Privilege Log. The index has been marked with Bates Numbers P-014924 thru P-015267. The documents referenced in the Third Supplemental Privilege Log will be delivered tomorrow to the Chambers of U.S. District Judge Kenneth A. Marra for ex parte in camera review, pursuant to the Court's Omnibus Order. Respectfully submitted, WIFREDO A. FERRER UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: s/A. Marie Villafafia A. MARIE VILLAFAFIA Assistant United States Attorney Florida Bar No. 0018255 500 South Australian Ave, Suite 40
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 013-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 v. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR FINDING OF VIOLATIONS OF THE CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS ACT AND REQUEST FOR A HEARING ON APPROPRIATE REMEDIES COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to move for a finding from this Court that the victims' rights under the Crime Victims Rights Act (CVRA), 18 U.S.C. § 3771, have been violated by the U.S. Attorney's Office, and to request a hearing on the appropriate remedies for these violations. The victims have proffered a series of facts to the Government, which they have failed to contest. Proceeding on the basis of these facts,' it is clear that the U.S. Attorney's Office has repeatedly violated the victims' protected CVRA rights, including their right to confer with prosecutors generally about the case and specifically abou
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
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.