ROY BLACK

Westlaw.

Westlaw. Pagel 749 F.3d 999, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 1270 (Cite as: 749 F.3d 999) H United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. Jane DOE NO. 1, Jane Doe No. 2, Plaintiffs-Appellees, 1. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. Roy Black, Martin G. Weinberg, Jeffrey Epstein, Intervenors-Appellants. No. 13-12923. April 18, 2014. Background: Alleged minor victims of federal sex crimes brought action against the United States alleging violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act ( CVRA) re- lated to the United States Attorney Office's execution of non-prosecution agree- ment with alleged perpetrator. After the victims moved for disclosure of corres- pondence concerning the non-prosecution agreement, the alleged perpetrator and his criminal defense attorneys intervened to assert privilege to prevent the disclos- ure of their plea negotiations. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida Court, No. 9:08-CV-80736-KAM, ordered disclosure. The inter- v

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2012 Page 1 of 23

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2012 Page 1 of 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING OF INTERVENORS ROY BLACK, MARTIN WEINBERG, AND JAY LEFKOWITZ IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER CONCERNING PRODUCTION, USE, AND DISCLOSURE OF PLEA NEGOTIATIONS During the hearing on August 12, 2011, the Court directed the proposed intervenors to file additional briefing on their argument that plea negotiations are privileged and not subject to discovery or use as evidence in these proceedings. Proposed intervenors submit the following memorandum of law, which is identical to Parts I and II of the memorandum of law submitted by proposed intervenor Jeffrey Epstein in support of his motion for a protective order and his opposition to the motions of the plaintiffs for production, use,

EFTA Document EFTA01355640

Jeffrey Epstein, Billionaire Pedophile, Goes Free - The Daily Beast

Jeffrey Epstein, Billionaire Pedophile, Goes Free - The Daily Beast Page 1 of 4 THE DAILY BEAST READ THIS SKIP THAT BLOGS & STORIES Billionaire Pedophile Goes Free PRINT Hedge fund mogul Jeffrey Epstein became a free man Wednesday, five years after he was first accused of sexually abusing underage girls. After months of reporting, The Daily Beast's reveals exclusive details of the investigation and the legal wrangling that saved him from a long prison term. She reports: • Palm Beach's police chief objected to Epstein's "special treatment" and gave The Daily Beast an exclusive look at his nine-hour deposition about the investigation. • Earlier versions of the U.S attorney's charges, including a sealed 53-page indictment, could have landed Epstein in prison for 20 years. • Victims alleged that Epstein molested underage girls from South America. Europe. and the former Soviet republics. including three 12-year-old girls brought over from France as a birthday gift. • The v

Reuters lawsuit alleges Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump raped a woman in 1994

The passage references a filed federal lawsuit directly accusing a former president (Donald Trump) and a convicted financier (Jeffrey Epstein) of rape, providing a concrete legal filing and potential Federal lawsuit filed in California alleging rape by Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump in 1994 Email chain includes Reuters reporter David Ingram seeking comment from Epstein The suit was attached to

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 99

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 99 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/2672011 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOES #1 AND #2, Plaintiffs, vs. UNITED STATES, Defendant. / ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs' Motion for Finding of Violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (DEs 48, 52), Plaintiffs' Motion to Have Their Facts Accepted Because of the Government's Failure to Contest Any of the Facts (DE 49), Plaintiffs' Motion for Order Directing the U.S. Attorney's Office Not to Withhold Relevant Evidence (DE 50), and Bruce E. Reinhart's Motion to Intervene or in the Alternative for a Sua Sponte Rule 11 Order (DE 79).1 All motions are fully briefed and ripe for review, and the Court has heard oral arguments on all motions. The Court has carefully considered the briefing and the parties' arguments and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court is awaiting supplemental brie