From. LiRy-Parrsetteiter-thetteher@thebfiterreetrit,
Extracted Text (OCR)
Technical Artifacts (3)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
Related Documents (6)
From: "Martin Weinberg"
From: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]>
From: '
From: Martin Weinberg <MINIM>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 9:08-ev-80736-Civ-ICAM JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2 I UNITED STATES JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER COME NOW Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to file this response in opposition to Epstein's Motion for a Protective Confidentiality Order (DE 247). Epstein's motion is a thinly-disguised attempt to relitigate issues already covered by the court's earlier ruling eleven months ago (DE 188), which allowed the victims to file correspondence relating to Epstein's non-prosecution agreement in the public court file. Rather than reverse its previous ruling, this Court should reaffirm it — and allow the important issues presented by this case to be litigated in the light of day. BACKGROUND Because of Epstein's penchant for relitigating issues that have already been decided, it
Miami U.S. Attorney’s Office recuses itself from Jeffrey Epstein case; DOJ nominee Barr pledges investigation
The passage reveals that a federal prosecutor's office recused itself from the high‑profile Epstein case and that AG nominee William Barr was pressed to investigate DOJ handling. This suggests a poten Miami U.S. Attorney’s Office formally recused itself from the Epstein victims’ rights case. The case was reassigned to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Atlanta. Senator Ben Sasse questioned AG nominee W
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.