Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00212527DOJ Data Set 9Other

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00212527
Pages
3
Persons
6
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. / NOTICE OF OBJECTION Petitioners Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 have moved for disclosure of settlement letters between the U.S. Attorney's Office and the lawyers who represented Jeffrey Epsicin during a federal criminal investigation. [DE 50 at 51. Doe 1 and Doe 2 seek to use these letters as evidence in this civil matter, and request the Court's permission to disseminate the letters to the international media [DE 511. Even though the letters are sealed and subject to a protective order issued by the Magistrate Judge in the related case 9:08-CV-80893, at least one of these letters was leaked last week to The Daily Beast, an online "omnivorous guide" to gossip and news that boasts 51 million web page views.' Some of the lawyers who represented Jeffrey Epstein during the federal criminal investigation an

Tags

eftadataset-9vol00009
Ask AI about this document

Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. / NOTICE OF OBJECTION Petitioners Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 have moved for disclosure of settlement letters between the U.S. Attorney's Office and the lawyers who represented Jeffrey Epsicin during a federal criminal investigation. [DE 50 at 51. Doe 1 and Doe 2 seek to use these letters as evidence in this civil matter, and request the Court's permission to disseminate the letters to the international media [DE 511. Even though the letters are sealed and subject to a protective order issued by the Magistrate Judge in the related case 9:08-CV-80893, at least one of these letters was leaked last week to The Daily Beast, an online "omnivorous guide" to gossip and news that boasts 51 million web page views.' Some of the lawyers who represented Jeffrey Epstein during the federal criminal investigation and whose work product was included in the settlement letters, object to the release and dissemination the settlement letters. These lawyers will be filing a motion to intervene and a memorandum of law within the 14-day period provided by the Rules to respond to DE 50 and DE The Daily Beast, www.thedailybeast.conilblogs-and-stories/2011-03-25/jeffrey- epstein-how-the-billionaire-pedophile-got-offeasy/2/, last visited March 27, 2011. EFTA00212527 51, which Doe 1 and Doe 2 filed on March 21, 2011. Members of the defense team will be objecting and seeking a protective order on the grounds that the letters fall under the protections of opinion work-product of the lawyers, as well as the broad protections of Federal Rules of Evidence 410 and 408, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, and the constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel. The lawyers will also object to dissemination of these letters because they contain information from the grand jury's investigation, and this information is confidential pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e). In an abundance of caution, defense team members two of the attorneys who represented Jeffrey Epstein during the investigation, are filing this pleading to provide notice to the Court and the parties of the intention to object to the disclosures sought by Doe 1 and Doe 2. A motion to intervene for this purpose, and a memorandum of law, will be filed no later than April 4, 2011. Attorney a member in good standing of the Massachusetts Bar, will be filing a motion for permission to appear pro hac vice in these proceedings. We certify that on March 28, 2011, we electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system. 2 EFTA00212528 We also certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent via separate email to all counsel of record. Respectfully submitted, 3 EFTA00212529

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

15p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

CM/ECF - Live Database

CM/ECF - Live Database r Page 1 of 3 U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (West Palm Beach) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 9:08-cv-80736-KA M Doe'. United States of America Assigned to: Judge Kenneth A. Marra Cause: no cause specified Date Filed: 07/07/2008 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant LRJ Date Filed # Docket Text 07/07/2008 1 EMERGENCY PETITION for Victim's Enforcement of Crime Victim's Rights Act 18 USC 3771 against United States of America Filing fee $ 350. Receipt#: 724403, filed by Jane Doe. (rb) (Entered: 07/07/2008) 07/07/2008 2 CERTIFICATE OF EMERGENCY by Jane Doe re 1 Complaint (rb) (Entered: 07/07/2008) 07/07/2008 3 ORDER requiring U.S. Attorney to respond to 1 Complaint filed by Jane Doe by 5:00 p.m. on 7/9/08. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 7/7/08. (ir) (Entered: 07/07/2008) 07/09/2008 4 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Dexter Lee on behalf of United States of America (

204p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

8p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

10p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

65p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 290 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/20/2015 Page 1 of 14

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 290 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/20/2015 Page 1 of 14 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 OPPOSITION TO JANE DOE #3 AND JANE DOE #4'S CORRECTED MOTION PURSUANT TO RULE 21 FOR JOINDER IN ACTION Respondent United States, by and through its undersigned counsel, files its Opposition to Jane Doe #3 and Jane Doe #4's Corrected Motion pursuant to Rule 21 for Joinder in Action (D.E. 280), and states: I. PETITIONERS' MOTION TO ADD TWO ADDITIONAL PARTIES SHOULD BE DENIED AS UNTIMELY This action was commenced by Jane Doe #1 on July 7, 2008 (D.E. I). The Court ordered the Government to file a response by July 9, 2008, which was done. On July 11, 2008, the Court held a hearing on the emergency petition. At that hearing, Jane Doe #2 was added to the petition. Now, over six years into the litigation, petitio

14p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.