Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00801635DOJ Data Set 9Other

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
efta-efta00801635
Pages
4
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

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 JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Intervenor. / INTERVENOR EPSTEIN'S SUBMISSION IN RESPONSE TO COURT ORDER OF FEBRUARY 21, 2019 (DE 435) INTERVENOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN, through undersigned counsel, respectfully submits this filing in response to the Court's Order of February 21, 2019 (DE 435), as clarified by the Court's Order entered the following day (DE 437). 1. On February 13, 2014, this Court entered an Order permitting Mr. Epstein "to intervene with regard to any remedy issue concerning the non-prosecution agreement in this case." (DE 246). 2. At the time, the Petitioners and the government were litigating whether the government had violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. §3771 ("CVRA"), by purportedly failing to confer with the Petitioners prior to entering into a Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") with Epstein in 2007. 1 EFTA00801635 3. On February 21, 2019, this Court entered an Order granting Petitioners' motion for partial summary judgment "to the extent that Petitioners' right to conferral under the CVRA was violated." (DE 435:33). 4. The Court ordered the parties to "confer and inform the Court within 15 days of the date of the entry of this Order how they wish to proceed on determining the issue of what remedy, if any, should be applied in view of the violation." (DE 435:33) (emphasis in original). 5. On February 22, 2019, the Court clarified that it "only directs the parties to confer on what submissions or proceedings they believe are necessary in order for the Court to make a determination on a remedy, if any. If the parties are unable to agree on the submissions or proceedings necessary, they may submit separate filings." (DE 437:1). 6. On March 1, 2019, the Department of Justice assigned the United States Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Georgia ("USAO-NDGA") to represent the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("USAO-SDFL") in this matter. 7. On March 7, 2019, the USAO-NDGA filed a motion seeking an enlargement of time until June 6, 2019, to confer with the Petitioners regarding the procedures for determining remedy. (DE 440). This Court granted an extension of time but indicated it will wait until Petitioners respond to the government's motion before determining the length of the extension. (DE 441). 2 EFTA00801636 8. In the meantime, Mr. Epstein's undersigned counsel, Roy Black and Jackie Perczek, areis currently at the end of week 4 of an expected 8-week trial before the Honorable Robert N. Scola in the case of United States v. Esfortnes, Case No. 16-20549- Cr-RNS. Mr. Black and Mrs. Perczek hasve not had sufficient time to focus on the Court's recent rulings or even to confer with co-counsel in an effort to achieve consensus about a course of action to determine remedy. if any. 9. On or about March 6, 2019, undersigned counsel for Mr. Epstein, Martin G. Weinberg, conferred with Bradley Edwards, Esq., counsel for the Petitioners, who has not yet indicated the specific remedy or remedies the Petitioners will be seeking. 10. Thus, in accordance with the Court's Order permitting him to intervene at the remedy stage (DE 246), and given the extension of time of uncertain length, Mr. Epstein respectfully requests that he be permitted to inform the Court of his position regarding the appropriate procedures for addressing what remedy if any, to impose in remedy in this matter case, if any, after if (and after) the Petitioners Parties inform the Court whether they that-the-Petitieners-will be seeking any remedy regarding sensor-Ring the NM. , Respectfully submitted, /s/Rov Black Roy Black, (FL Bar No. Jackie Perczek, Esq. (FL Bar No. 42201) BLACK, SREBNICK, KORNSPAN & STUMPF, 201 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 1300 Miami, Florida 33131 Tele: 3 EFTA00801637 Fax:U E-Mail: E-Mail: /s/Martin G. Weinberg Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. MARTIN G. WEINBERG, la. (MA Bar No. 20 Park Plaza, Suite 1000 Boston Massachusetts 02116 Tele: Fax: E-Mail: Is/ Scott A. Srebnick Scott A. Srebnick, Esq. (FL Bar No SCOTT A. SREBNICK, P. A. 201 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 1210 Miami Florida 33131 Tele: Fax: E-Mail: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 8th day of March, 2019, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CIWECF. According to the Court's website, counsel for all parties and intervenors are able to receive notice via the CM/ECF system. /s/Scott A. Srebnick Scott A. Srebnick 4 EFTA00801638

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

5(19/22, 3:52 PM SEA At. "250SC. fktmct

5(19/22, 3:52 PM SEA At. "250SC. fktmct JcereY Epsteh - Wildpedla Epstein a massage". She claims she was taken to his mansion, where he exposed himself and had sexual intercourse with her, and paid her $200 immediately afterward.1io61 A similar $50-million suit was filed in March 2008, by a different woman, who was represented by the same lawyer.E•g-91 These and several similar lawsuits were dismissed.1139-) All other lawsuits have been settled by Epstein out of court' ll Epstein made many art-pl-atirt r s_ettlements with alleged victims.W23 - - - _ E_XCAt "-Vet 5sE RItACt PnOi- CiOR °NICER • - 40L'aritfrieerPROS1 1701-i0.Ni o> SIE•us) i1/44".,e036( C ; Perversion of Justice, Miami Herald, November 30, 2018. Victims' rights: Jane Does v. United States (2014)*SC7ck%A L. ne,OSC Rt p Rom N)Eiszci poS IT c"),3 A December 3o, 2014, federal civil suit was filed in Florida by Jane Doe 1 ([REDACTED - Survivor]) and Jane Doe 2 against the United States for violations of the Crime Vi

32p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4p
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
Court UnsealedSep 9, 2019

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

839p
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.