UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Summary
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Mise-Marra/MatthrA mari JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S ANSWERS TO PETITIONERS' FIRST REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS I. Admit. 2. (a) Cannot admit or deny. Jeffrey Epstein's ("Epstein") attorneys learned of the notifications that were planned to be provided to persons designated as victims when contact was made with the attorney who was then representing Jane Doe #21 to determine how she wanted to be notified. At that time, Epstein's attorneys contacted the U.S. Attorney's Office ("USAO") and stated their objections to the procedure for notification and the legal bases therefore. Epstein's attorneys also objected to the designation of Jane Doe #2 as a victim because she had self-reported that she was not a victim. Members of the USAO considered those objections. (b) Admit. This attorney was being compensated by Epstein to represent Jane
Persons Referenced (10)
“...Executive Division at the USAO determined that attorneys for the USAO and the FBI agents would not confer with Jane Doe #1 prior to the USAO's decision to enter into t...”
Jane Doe #1Jeff Sloman“...h Epstein. I don't have any documentary evidence, but I have been told this by Jeff Sloman.] 21. [I don't know.] 22. [OPR needs to answer these.] 23. Admit. 24. [I do...”
Jane Doe #2“...DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Mise-Marra/MatthrA mari JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S ANSWERS TO PETITIONERS' FIRST REQUES...”
Epstein's Attorney“...senting Jane Doe #21 to determine how she wanted to be notified. At that time, Epstein's attorneys contacted the U.S. Attorney's Office ("USAO") and stated their objections to the procedure for not...”
U.S. AttorneyJack Goldberg“...aven't completed the review yet. So far there may be some personal emails with Jack Goldberger only. We don't have any telephone logs or other documents.] 17. [You need to check with DC about this. ...”
Jeffrey Epstein“...IONERS' FIRST REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS I. Admit. 2. (a) Cannot admit or deny. Jeffrey Epstein's ("Epstein") attorneys learned of the notifications that were planned to be provided to persons design...”
Tags
Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureRelated Documents (6)
Ulol.An
Ulol.An c7F all2,P, (Iwo% creb vEKs ioN uS Respot, ise- 7-0 I'm. ci-ae DE cot JANE Dca' K ur m 441) cf- FAcrs me,e/cPreb AS TAAL 0-9 LAS i'esSo9ct \Ise TO 4.9 TANIe mer;korioN reA_ Cettat D R.E.-LT/N1 bk NJ0T TO WITlifiXt evica•xu te- 50 LE 5O •TAoc (Ark' MonoN coan=t000QC.e-' rb . Wove v)oupoioNS Prf\16 TO UniScAL_ ictsti:Aise os- 5i (31 EFTA00177007 II. Q Q. EFTA00177008 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 1 of 42 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 I. UNITED STATES I 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 (CVR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Mise-Marra/MatthrA mari JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S ANSWERS TO PETITIONERS' FIRST REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS I. Admit. 2. (a) Cannot admit or deny. Jeffrey Epstein's ("Epstein") attorneys learned of the notifications that were planned to be provided to persons designated as victims when contact was made with the attorney who was then representing Jane Doe #21 to determine how she wanted to be notified. At that time, Epstein's attorneys contacted the U.S. Attorney's Office ("USAO") and stated their objections to the procedure for notification and the legal bases therefore. Epstein's attorneys also objected to the designation of Jane Doe #2 as a victim because she had self-reported that she was not a victim. Members of the USAO considered those objections. (b) Admit. This attorney was being compensated by Epstein to represent Jane
Case 9:08•cv-80736•KAM Document 190 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 1 of 3
Case 9:08•cv-80736•KAM Document 190 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2013 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE NI and JANE DOE #2, petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, respondent. FILED by D.C. JUN 1 8 2013 STEVEN M LARIMORE CLERK U S DIST. CT S 0 of FLA - W PB OMNIBUS ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the court on various motions. Upon consideration, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: I. The petitioners' protective motion seeking recognition of the availability of various remedies attaching to the CVRA violations alleged in this proceeding [DE 128] is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to renew the request for any particular form of relief or remedy in connection with the court's fmal disposition of petitioners' CVRA petition on the merits. 2. The intervenors' motion to strike the petitioners' supplemental authority regarding privilege claims [DE 177] is DENIED AS MOOT. 3. The petitioners' sealed motion for the co
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 I. UNITED STATES JOINT STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS The parties hereby stipulate and agree that the following facts are not in dispute and may be accepted as true: 1. Between about 2001 and 2006, defendant Jeffrey Epstein (a—billienaire—with—signifteant politieal-eenneetiens)-sexually-abusedinere-than-40 enticed into prostitution minor girls at his mansion in West Palm Beach, Florida, and elsewhere. Among the girls he sexually sed so enticed were Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2. Because Epstein, through others, used a means of interstate commerce and knowingly traveled in interstate commerce to engage in this conduct, te-abuse-Jane-Dee-#4-en43ane-Dee-#2-(and-the-ether-vietims), he committed violations of federal law, specifically repeated violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2422. 2. In 2006, at the request of the Palm Beach Police Department, the Federal Bureau of Inves
Case 1:19-cv-03377-LAP Document 101-1 Filed 12/20/19 Page 1 of 41
Case 1:19-cv-03377-LAP Document 101-1 Filed 12/20/19 Page 1 of 41 EXHIBIT A EFTA00092647 Case 1:19-cv-03377-LAP Document 101-1 Filed 12/20/19 Page 2 of 41 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK VIRGINIA GIUFFRE, Plaintiff, v. ALAN DERSHOWITZ, Defendant. ALAN DERSHOWITZ, Counterclaim Plaintiff, v. VIRGINIA L. GIUFFRE, Counterclaim Defendant. Civil Action No. I :19-cv-3377 (LAP) AMENDED COMPLAINT EFTA00092648 Case 1:19-cv-03377-LAP Document 101-1 Filed 12/20/19 Page 3 of 41 Plaintiff, formerly known as 'for her Complaint against Defendant, Alan Dershowitz, avers upon personal knowledge as to her own acts and status and upon information and belief and to all other matters: NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. This suit arises out of Defendant's sexual abuse of Plaintiff, his defamatory statements of and concerning Plaintiff, and his unlawful interception of Plaintiff's communications. 2. During 2000-2002, beginning when Plaintiff was 16, Plaintiff was
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 58
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 58 Entered on FLSD Docket 04707/2011 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 AND #2, Petitioners, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. UNITED STATES' RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO JANE DOES #1 AND #2'S MOTION TO HAVE THEIR FACTS ACCEPTED BECAUSE OF THE GOVERNMENT'S FAILURE TO CONTEST ANY OF THE FACTS IDE491 The United States, by and through the undersigned, hereby opposes Petitioners' Motion to have their "Statement of Undisputed Material Facts" accepted as true [DE49]. Petitioners argue that the Court should accept their Statement as true, despite its conclusory allegations and internal inconsistencies, solely because of the United States' failure to stipulate to the Statement. The Court should deny the motion because: (1) Petitioners have misstated that United States' efforts at reaching agreement on the Statement; (2) the "Undisputed Material Facts" are irre
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.