Court rejects litigation privilege claim for Jeffrey Epstein, signaling imminent public reckoning
Court rejects litigation privilege claim for Jeffrey Epstein, signaling imminent public reckoning The passage notes a court’s repeated rejection of Epstein’s attempt to shield himself behind litigation privilege, hinting at forthcoming mediation and potential exposure. While it identifies a powerful figure (Jeffrey Epstein) and a legal vulnerability, it lacks concrete details on transactions, dates, or specific misconduct beyond the general claim of perversion, limiting immediate investigative action. Key insights: Trial court has repeatedly rejected Epstein's claim of litigation privilege.; The rejection is described as well‑reasoned and unlikely to change.; Lawyers listed (Bradley Edwards, Jack A. Goldberger, etc.) are prepared for mediation.
Summary
Court rejects litigation privilege claim for Jeffrey Epstein, signaling imminent public reckoning The passage notes a court’s repeated rejection of Epstein’s attempt to shield himself behind litigation privilege, hinting at forthcoming mediation and potential exposure. While it identifies a powerful figure (Jeffrey Epstein) and a legal vulnerability, it lacks concrete details on transactions, dates, or specific misconduct beyond the general claim of perversion, limiting immediate investigative action. Key insights: Trial court has repeatedly rejected Epstein's claim of litigation privilege.; The rejection is described as well‑reasoned and unlikely to change.; Lawyers listed (Bradley Edwards, Jack A. Goldberger, etc.) are prepared for mediation.
Tags
Related Documents (6)
EFTA00020703
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
07/29/2011 14:05 FAX 5616845816
#291874/mep
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
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
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.