EFTA Document EFTA01659959

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-MarratIVIatthewman JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. UNITED STATES' NOTICE OF FILING THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL PRIVILEGE LOG Pursuant to the Court's June 18, 2013 Omnibus Order (DE 190), the Respondent, United States of America, by and through the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney, hereby gives notice of its filing of its Third Supplemental Privilege Log. The index has been marked with Bates Numbers P-014924 thru P-015267. The documents referenced in the Third Supplemental Privilege Log will be delivered tomorrow to the Chambers of U.S. District Judge Kenneth A. Marra for ex parte in camera review, pursuant to the Court's Omnibus Order. Respectfully submitted, WIFREDO A. FERRER UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: s/A. Marie Villafafia A. MARIE VILLAFAFIA Assistant United States Attorney Florida Bar No. 0018255 500 South Australian Ave, Suite 40

EFTA01659959

ROY BLACK

ROY BLACK HOWARD M. SREBNICK SaYIT A. KORNSPAN LARRY A. STUMPY? MARIA NEYRA JACKIE PERCZEK MARK A.J.lAPIRO JARED BLACK SREBNICK KORNSPAN STUMPF P.A. May 18, 2010 VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL Assistant United States Attorney United States Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida 500 South Australian Avenue Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 RE: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Counsel: JESSICA FONSECA-NADER KATHLEEN P. PHILLIPS AARON ANTHON MARCOS BEATON, JR. JENIPER J. SOULUCIAS NOAH FOX JOSHUA SHORE E-Mail: RBlack(lfioyBlack.com Jeff Sloman, Esq. United States Attorney 99 N.E. 4th Street Miami, FL 33132 Assistant United States Attorney 99 N.E. 4th Street Miami, FL 33132 We received notice this morning that Podhurst Orseck, P.A. has filed a civil complaint seeking over $2,000,000 in addition to the $526,000 they have already been paid by Jeffrey Epstein for their work as attorney representatives. As we communicated to you during our February 3, 2010

Subject: Epstein -- Call with Roy Black

From: To: Cc: Bce: Subject: Epstein -- Call with Roy Black Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:53:07 +0000 Importance: Normal and I spoke with Roy. Roy said that he had called because he had heard that Rolando had discussed the matter with Barry Krischer and Roy wanted to see if there was any way to wrap this up before July 7th. Roy also said that he had seen a letter from Jeff Sloman that said that the matter of incarceration would be left to the State. (I am not certain what letter he is referring to, but I think Jeff wrote a letter about not taking a position on where Epstein would be incarcerated, not the length of time.) So, Roy wondered whether we would go away if Epstein took Barry's 60-day deal. e xplained that Rolando had not had substantive discussions with Barry about the case and that all communication regarding the case is being handled by and me. In response to the question of whether there was anything that could "make this go away," we say our position is that if

Subject: RE: Epstein -- Call with Roy Black

From: To: Subject: RE: Epstein -- Call with Roy Black Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 19:20:12 +0000 Importance: Normal Nothing that I know of by way of final decision. From: Sent:\ e nes ay, une , To: Cc: Subject: Epstein -- Call with Roy Black and I spoke with Roy. Roy said that he had called because he had heard that had discussed the matter with Barry Krischer and Roy wanted to see if there was any way to wrap this up before July 7th. Roy also said that he had seen a letter from Jeff Sloman that said that the matter of incarceration would be left to the State. (I am not certain what letter he is referring to, but I thinkMwrote a letter about not taking a position on where Epstein would be incarcerated, not the length of time.) So, Roy wondered whether we would go away if Epstein took Barry's 60-day deal. explained that had not had substantive discussions with Barry about the case and that all communication regarding the case is being handled by and me. In response to